In recent times, malfunctions and bugs on the Blurt platform have become increasingly frequent.
This comes shortly after multiple price increases that have made a large portion of the user base increasingly reluctant to interact with the platform, particularly when considering the costs involved in relation to the potential “earnings.”
Let’s take a closer look at the situation.
-
The first BUG concerns the TAGS section.
More specifically, after pasting the tags while following the instructions as usual, the platform reports two different errors. In some cases, it indicates that the word-length limit has been exceeded; in others, it flags issues related to uppercase letters, hyphens, and other formatting requirements.
Obviously, none of these issues are actually present in the tags being entered.
I also tried switching nodes, but after doing so, a notification bar appears at the top of the page instructing me to return to the node rpc.blurt.blog.
This particular bug can be worked around by entering the tags manually, one by one. However, it is easy to understand how frustrating this becomes, as well as how much additional time it requires.
[SCREENSHOT — TAGS BUG]
-
The second bug occurs in the Notifications section.
More specifically, once notifications are received, we use the “Mark all as read” button to clear them — meaning to remove the red dots and notification counters.
Unfortunately, the notifications are not actually cleared. Even after refreshing the page, the red indicators and numbers remain visible.
To resolve this specific bug, the “Mark all as read” procedure has to be repeated three times. I tested this on several consecutive days, and the same behavior occurred every time: it consistently required three attempts to fully clear the notifications.
[SCREENSHOT — NOTIFICATIONS BUG]
-
Additional costs in the same section (Mark all as read)
In this same section, we can also observe the unacceptable additional fees that are charged every time users click the button to claim their earnings, which have already been taxed through the DPoS system.
It essentially feels as though users are being forced to pay an additional fee simply to access their own earnings — earnings from which 50% has already been deducted, plus the additional 3% associated with groups.
Adding yet another fee, and charging it repeatedly every time the “Mark all as read” button is triggered, is particularly difficult to justify.
Unfortunately, this has become one of the most frustrating and difficult-to-tolerate aspects of the platform.
[SCREENSHOT — ADDITIONAL FEES\ Mark all as read]
-
Bug in the Markdown Editor
Blurt’s editor is not particularly professional.
We are not expecting anything extraordinary, but at the very least, the editor should provide the essential tools needed to work in a simple, intuitive, and efficient way.
One of the most frustrating bugs concerns spacing and line breaks.
For example, if we try to create a horizontal divider using hyphens, the text can become visually “overlapped,” increasing in size and/or causing the divider itself to disappear.
One possible workaround is to add an extra blank line between the divider and the text, creating additional spacing between the two elements. However, this only works in some cases; in others, the extra space is not necessary.
Obviously, this creates an unnecessary obstacle for newcomers, especially those who are just starting out in the world of online writing and publishing.
Suggestions for improvement
This behavior should either be made consistent and predictable or, alternatively, the editor itself should be replaced or significantly improved.
A more advanced editor, such as the one used by Publish0x, could provide a much better experience. Ecency and similar platforms could also serve as useful references.
I previously made similar suggestions regarding Ecency, particularly concerning the implementation of additional formatting options, characters, and — above all — text colors. To this day, Ecency, after taking those suggestions into consideration, remains one of the better writing editors available in terms of the range of options it provides.
I would extend the same recommendation to Publish0x, especially because constructive feedback can be taken seriously when it is actually listened to and implemented.
The bottom line is simple: improve the editor. What Blurt currently offers is far too basic, unintuitive for many common actions, and ultimately frustrating to use.
[SCREENSHOT — MARKDOWN EDITOR BUG]
-
Reorganize or Remove the BLOG Section
As it currently stands, Blurt’s Blog section is almost useless as part of a user’s profile. In fact, it could potentially mislead many users, particularly newcomers.
Many users, especially those with limited time or those acting too quickly, may cast votes simply to cast them. This can be particularly problematic with multi-account users, when they are voting on other users’ content.
The Blog section is therefore the first section displayed on many profiles. Some users use it to “share” interesting posts from other users and/or to repost their own content, although in my opinion the latter serves little practical purpose.
Why should it be reorganized or removed?
On Blurt, as with other DPoS-based systems, the voting mechanism is tied to a seven-day period. Once that period has passed, voting on older content is no longer useful.
As a result, this section can create confusion or lead to mistakes, particularly for new or less attentive users. A user who is unfamiliar with how the system works may simply click on the first post available in the Blog section and cast a vote without realizing that the content may already be outside the relevant voting period.
The recommendation, therefore, is to reverse the order of the sections, making “Posts” the default/main page of a user’s profile.
An even better solution would be to rename the existing “Posts” section as “Blog”, while creating a new, separate section — similar to the system used by Ecency — where users can freely write and share posts without additional costs.
Naturally, the existing publication costs associated with the initial creation and publication of a post would remain unchanged.
[SCREENSHOT — BLOG / POSTS SECTION]
-
A Comment Can Cost More Than a Post — PURE MADNESS
As many people know, the stability and long-term sustainability of a platform, particularly a social platform, depends largely on interaction.
These interactions grow according to a variety of factors that go far beyond simple likes or dislikes. Cultural background, personal experiences, different perspectives, and many other individual factors form the foundation of interaction within a community. Naturally, the overall quality of a community can grow as the quality of those interactions increases.
Apparently, however, this is something Blurt still has not understood, despite the platform having been active for six years. Could this also be one of the reasons why it seems to remain stuck at the same point?
Let’s look at another aspect of the current system.
Following the latest updates, someone among the WITNESSES decided that it was a good idea to increase the cost of comments as well — costs that, in my opinion, should not exist at all.
But apparently, on BLURT, we have adopted a rather self-defeating approach, believing that increasing these costs somehow helps preserve the “STRUCTURE” of the platform.
This is a serious mistake.
Not only does it discourage or completely eliminate interaction, but it also prevents users from building relationships, exchanging ideas, and getting to know one another. This is particularly damaging for new users.
Imagine someone arriving on the platform with a budget of just 50 BLURT.
They create an introductory post, which in 90% of cases will probably receive little to no attention, let alone votes. Then, in an attempt to make themselves known, that same user starts SPENDING their BLURT by voting for other users — most of whom will not even notice the vote, because its effective value may be 0.
Now add the fact that this person, like myself, may create relatively long posts and comments because they have a more ADVANCED level of expression and prefer detailed communication.
Do the math.
GOODBYE, USER.
We have just lost a potential THINKING, CONTRIBUTIVE MEMBER of the community — someone who, through their own contributions, as I am attempting to do right now, might have generated greater interest in the project or simply encouraged someone else to discover and become interested in it.
And this is not even taking into account the costs associated with creating posts and editing existing posts.
The latter is particularly OUTRAGEOUS, with the cost of editing a post reaching up to three times the cost of creating the original post itself.
[SCREENSHOT — COMMENT COST]
[SCREENSHOT — THIS POST EDITING COST]
6) Final Conclusions, Further Recommendations and Ideas
The bugs mentioned above are not the only ones. For example, since the beginning of September, Blurt’s website has also been experiencing compatibility issues with Microsoft Edge. More attentive users may have noticed a significant and persistent freeze that left the site virtually unusable, with the problem remaining for at least four or five days.
Throughout all the bugs described above, I also carried out numerous troubleshooting tests, including incognito browsing, temporarily disabling antivirus software, changing cookie settings, and other checks. Unfortunately, these tests did not resolve the underlying problems.
Some of these issues were, strangely enough, resolved after discussions and exchanges of views with one of the platform’s most prominent witnesses. Others are still present, although I hope a solution will soon be provided — and, hopefully, a definitive one — considering the amount of analysis, research, reporting, and support I have personally invested in platforms that are willing to listen.
What about the costs?
During my time on the platform, I have proposed several different solutions, some of which I believe are genuinely SMART and practical.
I am convinced that placing all these costs directly on users is the wrong approach, as well as being highly unprofessional.
There are other ways to manage the costs. Here are some FEASIBLE solutions:
-
Advertising banners within the website.
This could generate an additional source of revenue without directly charging users for every interaction.
-
Partnerships with survey platforms.
Blurt could establish collaborations with legitimate survey websites, with the resulting revenue in USD being managed by Blurt and used exclusively to cover platform costs and generate rewards for participating users.
Users could receive their rewards in BLURT, based on the exchange value applicable on the day the survey is completed. This could potentially be implemented through an internal points system that can be converted into BLURT, without requiring external exchanges for every transaction and while keeping the entire process within an internal reward pool.
-
Witnesses should create initiatives and contests instead of continually increasing costs.
If witnesses are constantly struggling with insufficient resources, they should consider creating initiatives, competitions, and community events that can generate value through voting, delegations, and similar mechanisms.
Simply increasing costs and placing the burden on users is likely to have the opposite effect in the long term: users will eventually become frustrated and leave.
These are not inventions or assumptions; they are based on observable statistics and user behavior.
-
Create events that involve EVERYONE.
The platform could introduce simple, accessible, and easy-to-manage events that are straightforward both for organizers and participants.
A concept similar to fantasy football leagues (FantaCalcio) or comparable community games could be particularly effective. Such initiatives could increase engagement while also creating opportunities to attract new users.
There are also other external projects and fundraising mechanisms that could be explored, including the creation of dedicated spaces within the website for video advertisements, pop-up content, and similar revenue-generating formats.
And why stop there?
Blurt could also demonstrate greater long-term vision by developing an innovative game inspired by platforms such as Smeet, but redesigned specifically for the crypto ecosystem and, above all, integrated with Blurt.
There are countless possibilities. The important thing is to stop thinking exclusively about how to charge users more and start thinking about how to create new sources of value and revenue.
For now, however, we will stop here, because this post is already becoming quite long and we have already moved into the territory of consulting and strategic proposals.
So, after everything discussed in this post, I hope that some things will genuinely begin to change.
The question remains — and I hope someone will answer it with actions, not just words:
Is Blurt ready for change, or will it end up exactly like Hive?
Respond in large numbers.
But before you do, there is one thing worth remembering:
People become attached to people, not to projects. Get that into your heads.
