Creator Subscriptions: Tackling Abuse with Challenges

_SOURCE

---

Feedback on Creator Subscriptions and Anti-Abuse Concerns

Hey everyone, hope you're all doing well. Recently, I came across the new "Creator Subscriptions" feature by Leofinance, and it sparked some questions in my mind. Consider this post my feedback on the Creator Subscriptions.

For those unfamiliar with it, you can read the official announcement here:

Introducing Creator Subscriptions | Paywall Encrypted Content on Hive, Earn More Crypto

How Creator Subscriptions Work

---

VERY IMPORTANT: Sub-only blog posts live as encrypted comments on the Hive blockchain. This was very important to me as we are able to keep the encrypted blogs off of your main Blog Feed on Hive. For many authors, they don't want their normal L1 Hive Blog Post Rewards to be effected by other forms of content. Our workaround for Threads (Short-form microblogging) is very similar to what we've now created for encrypted blogs. Instead of pushing to the base-layer and interfering with Hive Social standards around blog posts, your encrypted sub-only blogs will get posted as comments and live outside the standard Hive L1 blog feeds.

(Soucre: from above mentioned post)

This being said, the encrypted content are comments on the Hive Blockchain. This means that any user can still upvote them normally and as long as they are posted via https://inleo.io, they are eligible for both LEO and HIVE rewards pool rewards.

(Soucre: from above mentioned post)

---

Testing Paid Blogs/Microblogs

?ex=6708003e&is=6706aebe&hm=899ae53fd8a2ba4a94bd32f56d7d1632f43d20aad725b3c386ddbff91ff8402a&

Recently, Gwajnberg tested this feature (during a public discussion in discord), and upvotes were enabled for a paid post. While I have no issue with premium content behind a paywall, it's concerning that subscriber-only content can still receive upvotes. For instance, anyone paying 5 HBD a month to Gwajnberg can access the post.

Why This Could Be a Problem for Anti-Abuse?

Here’s where it gets tricky. Since the content is encrypted, no one can see if the post is high quality or just nonsense, like “jajajajajajaja…”.

This means if a post gets a $10 upvote, we wouldn’t know if it’s worth it. It could be a well-written guide or just a random picture of a cat.

The Bigger Issue: Hive’s Shared Reward Pool

When authors decline rewards on encrypted posts, there’s no issue. But when rewards are allowed, it means every stakeholder on Hive contributes to a post they can’t even see or judge.

Since authors are already earning from subscriptions, why take additional rewards from Hive’s shared pool? The Leo token already offers a parallel economy to handle this if it's necessary, so why involve Hive rewards?

Conclusion: Potential for Abuse

In summary, allowing author rewards from Hive’s pool on encrypted, subscriber-only content could lead to abuse and even flag wars. I’m not against innovation or trying something new, but it’s important to take user feedback seriously and make adjustments when necessary.

Well, those are just my thoughts. I'm just a Hive user like the rest of you.