I guess we can never have an utopia since human are involved. There will be contrasting views especially since has no 'solid' rules.
The saga has turn to power tussle and not in the interest of the community. I am queuing behind any sides. But it is the case of other thiefs condemning another because he stole more..sorry about my analogy.
Most people here are 'guilty' of self voting. Though many will claim they only do it on post and not comments but Steemit itself does not discourage self voting in any form. There is even options to upvote your post when creating it.
Though it is important not to get greedy but calling out someone because he 'sins' more is suspicious.
I think none is in this saga with real interest of the community in mind.
Thank you for a good post. You really shed light on the most controversial issue on Steemit
The structure of the reward pool allows for the very wealthy to simply buy the pot through the purchase of a disproportionate amount of Steem then directing the reward pool funds to themselves. While this is not necessarily against the rules, it undermines the whole concept of the currency and if allowed to happen, would devaluate (Is that a word?)the currency to 0. So in that aspect, it's good to see the community react.
Thank you for your great comment.
So why are "we" allowing for this systemic flaw (people being able to vote for themselves) and who has the ability to change it @moeknows?
I can't speak for @ned and @dan, but I imagine that it is there to provide incentive to buy Steem. It gives it a commodity value in addition to the monetary value we assign to it. They want to give the ability to use it, but want to be able to limit abusing it.
I believe the only way to change that would be to change the coding and the parameters of the smart contract. This would mean a hardfork. The top 20 witnesses vote on the hardfork changes. So I believe it would be a matter of coming up with a solution, communicating that to Steem Inc., and having witnesses vote on it.
Anybody feel free to jump in and correct me if I got any of that wrong.
Or becoming a witness? Not sure how well this mirrors civil government but at least in civil gov. if you want to make a change in the laws you have the opportunity to run for office and win if enough others want your changes. How much is 2020 going to be like an election? And I don't think that's a bad thing because there really is no better method for the "will of the people" to be accomplished than for the people to elect a few to make these decisions on their behalf.
Could be, in which case they didn't anticipate the abuse, or believed that somehow the "market" would correct it. I don't think we need the incentive in the first place so we just need to get rid of it, in my not-so-humble opinion.
What incentive? The reward pool? The whole platform is entered around it.
They did anticipate the abuse which is why they included tat section in the whitepaper along with a theory on what would happen.
The monetary incentive to upvote one's self. It should be eliminated.
Is it possible to eliminate voting for self and how can that be accomplished @golddeejay?