@ats-david, I have taken my time to reply as I wanted to think it through and ensure that I was not going to be too strident. You know my attitude towards the whole concept of steemit is extremely positive. Unfortunately, the ramifications of your proposals will cause greater centralisation, further reduce the value of steem and create a disincentive for people to join the platform.
The powers that be, rely upon content from other people. Seven of the top 23 account holders have written less than five posts each, some none, yet they are getting fatter upon the labours of others. You might call this the value of ownership. The feudal system was more generous.
The concept of making a comment have equal standing to a post whether it be made by Trump or the Angel Gabriel is absurd and is further encouraging crap content. The rewards pool split should not be referred to as 75% to the author because it is not. It is 75% of about 60%. So, it is already about 45%. I say these things in the backdrop of a 0.7% vote which I saw recently. If a vote from a steemian is worth, say, $0.002 as mine is and I decide that I shall give say 1% of that to a post which has been worked on assiduously for hours (you can tell), are you really telling me that that is good behaviour in the context of 'Social Media?' To reduce your appreciation, paltry as it is, to $0.00002 - this is where the system loses all appeal to the world. You would not treat a beggar with such disdain. Why treat a fellow steemian with such contempt?
These % votes, when they do not register are distributed back to the holders of SP, as I understand it thereby causing further concentration, albeit tiny.
There seems to be a better understanding of what is healthy for steemit amidst the 'have-nots' a vast amount of whom are posting for 100% SP whilst the top 1% of the owners of SP are selling (on a net basis). There are notable exceptions and notable buyers.
Everyone has their own lives to lead and their own financial situation. The heart of this community and its strength is not apparent in the community of whales as a whole - the self-interest has been shown to be self-harming. Nobody is man or woman enough to stand up and see the truth of the results of self-serving behaviours. Without enforced decentralisation, steemit will be accursed with low steem value and a malaise of mistrust.
I have a very different vision of steemit and it is a magnificent possibility. The nit-picking over curation yield curves is to demonstrate a thorough misunderstanding of the task at hand.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: