those users could still vote and reward others, they would just get no returns
But then why would they vote? The largest investors are the most important here and we're all talking like we can change the rules after they put their money in.
Why is everybody acting like a whale shouldn't get paid for their investment?
Imagine being invited to invest in something which you could only take out gradually over the course of 2 years only to find out that if you want to take your money out you won't gain anything for the investment. What was the point? And we'll never get more investors that way.
Jesus we're not just entitled but ungrateful too.
In reading smooth's take on the situation (plus many others have made well reasoned statements as well), I agree with him. I have changedg mind on the powering down portion of the proposal. Since I don't care for the voting pool idea I guess I don't like any of it then.
That said is the only incentive to vote curation rewards?
That's the entire purpose of curation rewards - to create the incentive.