I understand what you're saying now. But, I wouldn't consider this a change in the platform. More a refinement of a change that is already in existence.
The problems you speak of are valid. However, the whale votes do not always come from the whales manually. I am addressing the issue of whale power being used to redirect the rewards pool towards a select few repeatedly.
So, I feel we are in agreement on the problems that need to be fixed, but I don't think you are seeing how this guild will be able to make the changes that clearly you and I both want to see.
I also want to mention that this is not intended to be a permanent part of Steemit. I feel that once the trending posts start to represent the best that we have to offer, and once those who are deserving of it start getting rewarded for their work, the user retention problem will be solved and we will begin to draw in new users.
Think of this as stabilizers on a bicycle to help a kid learn to how to ride. Once Steemit has enough of a user base, there will be no need for the stabilizers anymore and we can put an end to the guild and revel in excitement at a newly improved and successful platform that each of us helped to build.
@son-of-satire, with all due and proper respect to you, in all earnest truth, when we get our Raleigh, the peleton will have rushed past on the latest carbon fibre racing bikes. What @freebornangel has said is absolutely right.
The rep score is understood to be a little irrelevant. What is relevant is the value of a vote. This is the building block system of steemit. Why is everyone so opposed to displaying the value of everyone's vote in a culture of transparency?
The answer to the question is that this will expose the exponential curve.
A system such as this should make it possible to reach the top. If it does not, as @freebornangel said, we might as well be on Google or Facebook because the whales are profiting from the minnows.
I have done the mathematics and it is an undeniable truth.
The leverage of investors is one thing (still unhealthy). The leverage of miners is a leverage which is unsustainable, irrational and unjustifiable.
As I said, I write these words with the greatest of respect to you!
As a sunote, please see this and see the responses: Guilds
This is a problem that is beyond my abilities or my power to change. I can't remove curation rewards or the likes.
However, what is within my power, is stopping a number of dolphins heading to become new whales unjustly, rather than allowing more minnows to become dolphins.
This will help to give minnows more power. And when they have enough, there will be no more need for any guilds at all.
No offence was taken at all. I'm not against people sharing their views.
I'd like to see the minnow math moved at least two decimals to the left.
If my vote is now worth x I'd like to see what happens with the math if that was increased to 10x, 100x, and 1000x.
Perhaps this simple change will give the dust reason to go ahead and get in the water, while not radically altering the seascape.
I'm not opposed to guilds, I contribute to @crowdfundedwhale, but I do disagree with some people pulling out exponentially more at the top and discouraging hope for future growth that is fed by rewards at the bottom.
I hope you that you are correct.
I hope that curation awards aren't taken away.
I hope the payout doesn't go to seven days.
I wish the power down would go to 10 months.
I don't want to make a set of rules for the whales and another for everybody else.
We are in a pond, no need to make some fish more equal than others, any more than already exists.
Behavior changes can rectify what folks are concerned about.
Imo.
I agree with your points. I don't want those things either. Though I'm not opposed to a three day fixed payout cycle with a three month secondary cycle to keep people sticking around.
Also, I think 30 weeks would be best for power downs, with 3% per week until the 30th week when the remaining 13% is released.
I have my reasons for this, but I shall save a long-winded explanation on this post, as it's not related to the subject matter.
I'm not strongly opposed to a three day and ninety day payouts, though I think changes should be made one at a time and not too close to each other so that they may be evaluated on their own merits.
Yes. I agree.
By the way, if you're interested in joining the discussion about this guild, and how we can improve the current model, I just made a server on discord for anyone to come and share their thoughts.
https://discord.gg/hx5Pn
I will certainly do that when I get an internet connection better suited to my needs.