I currently disagree with more than 50% of the reward allocated to current authors and therefore would prefer the reward I downvote be burned instead of being moved to equally undeserving people.
We're not mainstream yet. Contributor reward should be made to be elastic.
It's been talked about letting the DHF allocate the whole reward pool to "content" pool but I've never seen even a complete description of how that could be implemented.
I am kinda pro and against this at the same time. Not sure what to think about this.
I fear this could heavily increase and incentivise downvoting. Gamification of downvoting seems wrong to me.
But it would be an easy sink to reduce supply and would increase value of tokens over time.
As designed, ownership of stake allows voting with that stake's weight on where the inflation goes, not whether it happens. I think that's a good design.
I am not surprised to see a that a large stakeholder, who does not participate in creation or consumption of creative content, wants to decrease inflation to those who do. That's simple game theory and economics, since as long as inflation outpaces the growth of a user's stake, that user's share of the total value of the platform is falling. To generalise that concept, as long as a user is not receiving over 50% of total inflation, that user stands to gain (at least from a pure numbers perspective) by inflation being limited or stopped as a whole.
I disagree with the proposal, though, and I hope others do too, not only because as a smaller stakeholder it would negatively impact me, but also because this platform is far from just a zero-sum numbers game and I do not believe anyone treating it like one deserves to be rewarded for that.
Anyone who wants to do so is always free to create posts with beneficiaries set to @null and vote them.
If you're passive and very efficient at curation (which is pretty hard to consistently get more rewards out than you put in) you could grow your account faster than the average inflation per account. But even if you're super efficient if someone decides to flag stuff you upvoted your efficiency goes way down.
I don't really agree that downvoting should be free to do.
It's amazing how you think authors are being rewarded too much, even if the high-reward authors are getting $5 - $15 worth of rewards for their posts.