Yes, but it also removed the cost for policing spam. Before, fighting spam and abuse meant foregoing curation rewards. The people working hardest for blockchain integrity and reward pool abuse correction were effectively hobbled. That was bad, too.
COnsidering myself and others were delegating power to them to offset that often I don't think that was as much a factor. Creating additional accounts for that purpose and then allowing people to delegate power to them worked. Also if they begin to misuse that power the delegations could be removed.
Yes, but it also removed the cost for policing spam. Before, fighting spam and abuse meant foregoing curation rewards. The people working hardest for blockchain integrity and reward pool abuse correction were effectively hobbled. That was bad, too.
COnsidering myself and others were delegating power to them to offset that often I don't think that was as much a factor. Creating additional accounts for that purpose and then allowing people to delegate power to them worked. Also if they begin to misuse that power the delegations could be removed.
Now they can just abuse without cost.
Yep... Because they decided we needed more downvoting...
Yes