There are limits to how much you would restrict what people can do with Steem as it could hamper good activities. It was intended that users would curate to get rewards where they are deserved, but it seems selling votes is more lucrative. If specific measures were added to stop that then people may find ways around it. People are more versatile and it's up to them how we move forward. I'll keep on flagging abusers.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yes, one needs to think carefully about code changes. One of the results of game theory is that bad actors can never be wholly removed from a system, but their rewards can be minimised to the extent that they do not create a "bad system".
In the film The Matrix, the Architect describes that the system has gone through a number of iterations; none of them perfect but converging towards some optimal goal.
Apart from changing a few obvious parameters, the Steem economy has not seen significant iterations. And as we have seen, those parameters are not sufficient to change the economy; they have merely changed the profitability of bad actors. "Bad", as always, refers to the tendency of a system to converge towards some fixed point whereby bad actors become significant.