There is a danger in simply making that assumption. Did anyone ever know their total holdings? What specifically did they feel they committed to with this benevolent whale argument that justified the huge stake in the beginning? These are important questions because the shareholders of Steemit.inc have an incentive, I believe, to preserve their holdings of steem. The more work the community does and the less use of the steem holdings...the potential improvement in profits for steemit.inc. Different people have a very different idea of what produces value in the end.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
You can see that big accounts of fonder not active in terms of votes, authors rewards usually are declined. So their stake are slowly diluted in favor of active members. I would not worry too much about inequality.
This is about the stability of the economy which is growing around steem, not about the rate of steem distribution from the 2nd tier whale accounts. There is only one whale, steemit. :)
Then the answer is that it is not stable 😉
Perhaps.....so anyone who values steem, naturally must attempt to address any potential for imbalance. This is not a new idea. It was my understanding that those in control of the steemit and other whale accounts were always going to use that power for benevolent, helpful reasons. But Steemit.inc is a company and we must not forget and at the very least ensure that something is being done in a timely fashion.