I wrote this there and i repeat it here:
After discussion with the witnesses, it was decided to apply the “vote dust” shift to all votes equally. Each vote that is cast will be shifted down by about 1.219 SP. This effectively establishes a “baseline” voting strength that applies to everyone, while still maintaining a linear rewards curve for votes above the baseline. This way even large Steem Power holders won’t be able to profit from casting countless inconsequential votes.
Few words...
I think this will create a sort of iniquity.
The splitting up of big upvote is better of a 100% upvote to a lucky author (Perhaps his friend).
well, there is iniquity already established in the existing system. I don't think that this rule is intended to make us vote at 100% all the time, I think the intent is to make it less profitable for a whale to send out 1% votes on 1000s of posts a day in order to collect curation rewards.
Some of these accounts that they are trying to discourage have Voting Power Percentages down in the 30% range, and even though their vote power at 100% would be huge, at a certain point it becomes tiny. By making this reduction, eventually those votes become dust and the profit goes away.
I think (and this is conjecture, nothing more) that the effort is to make people be more focused on what they vote on for curation rewards rather than simply having the shotgun effect of voting everything and see what you catch.
I'm still not convinced, but time will tell who's right ;-)
Thanks for your answer.
I'm with your thinking here. Great write up Mike btw!
If Whales are encouraged to not split their vote, then to me this is going to mean less votes going round to folks who at present they might 'stick a small one on' because they had a bit of SP spare for the day.
My pessamistic view of the above is, Steemvoter doing overtime when the top 500 accounts' posts hit 15 minutes, and less for everyone else.
We shall see...