RE: Seems Quiet Here: Scroll Through My Blog Someday and Read the Comment Section and Of Course This Title Has Nothing To Do With The Post

There are solutions to the problem that are ignored. The problem is not the rate of financial incentive to manipulate rewards via stake, but that potential to manipulate. It is stake weighting itself that creates the problem of distribution. Curation rewards at any level can only worsen the problem if it exists. Absent unlimited stake weighting, curation rewards no longer are mechanisms that encourage profiteering and extraction of the value of the investment vehicle.

There are reasons that stock corporations do not preserve healthy ecosystems, and generally off shore expenses while extracting value maximally, and it is unrestricted stake weighting behind all of them.

Nature is proving to be a font of wisdom to researchers developing technology and biomimicry has been critical to many cutting edge advances of late. One thing you see in natural ecosystems is a balance between predators and prey, both in population and body size. The predators are confined to limits that reflect the ability of prey to succeed.

Only successful prey can support successful predators sustainably. Nature has crafted ecosystems and species that reflect this reality. Predatory species are limited to consuming ~10% of their prey, and this weighting is demonstrated in every such relationship on Earth I have familiarity with. Business has not. This produces the unsustainable economies we observe today. [Edit: I have been both a professional biologist and an accredited investor, for what it's worth.]

On Steem, unrestricted stake weighting enables the whales to extract ~90% of rewards and leaves content creators sharing the rest. This is the opposite of what is observed in predator/prey relationships in nature. It is hubris to think that the result of more than 3 billion years of experience can easily be improved on, but fools rush in where angels fear to tread.