I have tried to keep my opinion on this on the sideline to try and get as organic response as possible from the community. I was going to run a few pools, to get a feel where everyone is at. I do like the curve to be 100% flat, I am not sold on the competitive curation aspect, I like a more chill and curate style, which I believe could lead to more realistic payouts. IE a post can earn 400$ if it deserves it, as people won't be penalized for voting late. The same is true, popular creators won't always get big payouts because no one benefits voting on "popular" authors.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The competitive curve was added to incentivize finding of the best content, but what it actually did IMO, was to incentivize curation sniping or voting on posts with as few votes as possible. And I think a prolonged 24h window is just going to incentivize people to vote on popular posts, otherwise, you're losing money. And for accounts like appreciator, they have to do it or freedom is choosing another account who gives him/them better APR.
100%
But some people can't shake off the idea that it is possible to choose the right incentive model to get a perfect reward distribution based on the true value of posts.
The truth is, the value of posts is completely subjective, and it is not guaranteed that anyone will ever agree with the ranking of most voted posts at any moment. The only concern should be fairness and simplicity. Not changing the incentive 100 times.