From a simple game theory perspective there's no way any individual generating steady income or retaining a large portion of the steem created would ever want to accidentally invite any users to the platform who would prove themselves to be capable of both reducing the geographical vulnerability of the network and improving the network by creating useful services that run on the blockchain. Competition is bad, mmmkay. But as an aggregate they would be better off trying to improve things because the market will eventually punish us for our hubris when other social media websites come to steal our ste... thunder.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
tl;dr - the witnesses are selfish and they need to stop being so, else we're effed?
If there was any real competition for the positions then you'd start to see effort more equivalent to the amount the position pays out, otherwise it will stay looking like a bunch of seats that have been gerrymandered so hard that no one reasonable and new, even if over-qualified, will bother to try to get elected.
Yeah, competition sounds cool and functional. Have any way of measuring their "worth" in mind?
Some benchmarks etc?