I read all that and I just want to talk about this prompt for a few minutes:

Voting should be tied to the quality of content, which, in the context of streaming, can be subjective.

A mass of consumers always gets this right. You and I as consumers might think it's corny, but if thousands gravitate towards it naturally, they're not wrong.

On Youtube for example, you can sit there and watch a rocket not move for an hour with a countdown in the corner, while someone excited about rockets talks about rockets. To majority of people, that's not interesting.

Off to the side you see all this money pouring in from the audience. Change the channel and there's the same rocket, different personality, and money pouring in.

They're paying more for the people they connect with rather than what's on screen. Communities form around those people. Nothing is forced. It's all natural. Someone streaming gaming content and not saying anything will naturally earn a lot less compared to the individual inside the box off in the corner talking nonstop and engaging with their viewers as they play.

The content is free, and Youtube takes a 30% cut from all that money falling from the sky for whatever reason. At the end of the day, factoring in all livestreams, Youtube made a pile of money from the smallest section of the audience. Majority viewed, fewer chatted, fewer than that paid.

Here, that money is votes. That's how I see it. And the audience takes a 50% cut. That's the better deal for that scenario. In essence it's just a perk and I can see you understand perks generate more interest. Your percentage could be less than 1% and you'd still be able to make a lot of money if this concept took off, just from that.

Traditionally, we'd call that "curation reward" but that's only the surface. In reality these are just tools and a frontend could rebrand it into something more suitable for their market quite easily. In general, most people aren't curators, so selling them the opportunity to be one on a streaming platform won't go very far. Reality is already showing us what they'd prefer to be doing.

This comes standard on Hive. People can build their business on top of it and tie it in. Since so many platforms provide products meant for consumers on Hive, it's wise to have a universal solution so the attention can spill over from frontend to frontend, product to product, without that consumer having to go through a million hoops just to support a stream here, a video there, that article, those photos, some music over there.

They're still able to contribute to the success of your business, then ease in to rest of what you're offering if that's what they want to invest more time on. Then, if things work out, that consumer can spend years enjoying and supporting content online, as they do, and have something to show for it later in life.

The tokenized community idea is neat, but if the consumer had to buy bread tokens to buy bread, milk tokens to buy milk, water tokens to buy water and so on, the inconvenience would cause all those products to suffer.

That's the angle I'm coming from. I'm looking at the entire Hive picture. And I'm confident you'll be able to run your business as you see fit, so I wont comment on that or critique those layers. They're yours.

Often, the role of the consumer is left out of every project I stumble into here. So I'm attempting to describe how what comes standard gives all businesses on Hive a leg up, provided they attract outside interest to their offerings, which rarely occurs.