We've interviewed many scientists. Some value prestige, some value money, and some value both (some don't care about either one). We shouldn't paint all scientists with a single brush. Also, if you think

Thank you, and good luck to you as well.

What's the final use case of the currency that makes someone invest fiat into it? <<<< Not sure what you mean by this. Can you please elaborate? Steem Power represents more voting power. The

So, if I understand correctly: you would rather have scientists earn zero money and zero prestige for their work? Also, remember: in order to truly understand something, you must be able to explain it

Hi, if you understand SteemIt, then you understand where the money comes from: inflation. Like SteemIt, we pay researchers to A) Publish scientific papers and B) Collaborate (comment) on them. Approximately

It wouldn't be a valuable use of my time to convince someone who already has their mind made up, wouldn't you agree? Assuming there isn't anything I could say to change your mind, I'll leave it at this:

I agree 100%. If reputation can be bought, it could possibly have a negative affect on the quality of the research being published. This is why we've been working on an economic model that mimics the real

Hi, thanks for the reply. As far as not getting paid, that's fine. However, I would imagine that you care about your reputation, right? Similar to SteemIt, users can choose to keep their Lab Dollars vested