The scenario generally will play out this way. A big investor comes in with a considerable amount of steem. So they have a good stake. The problem is they don't necessarily have a good curation process to make steemit the platform overall more valuable by allocating rewards to valuable content. To be clear in the understanding of the idea of steemit. Large stakeholders control more of the rewards pool. They don't have a consensus on what is quality content. Both these ideas are foreign to one another.
Whereas in account based voting you have a majority consensus on post by virtue of each vote in a democratic way. Unfortunately accounts can be duplicated and fake which undermines this not only in value of the content to the community. It devalues the rewards pool.
So what is my suggestion and why do i feel a considerable amount of steem needs to be given over to my suggestion. My suggestion is a project called Steemitocracy. Steemitocracy is already a working model and site. It allows for a steemian votes to be counted across the network on a merit basis and consensus basis.
To help one understand this. An averag of the value of votes across trending hot pages would be broken down to value per vote divided by average reward. So you would have for instance if a person received 10 votes.. Each vote equaled $1. Steemitocracy would value the post at $10.
Where steemitocracy is different from many other approaches. It doesn't look to change the voting parameters at all. This can not only be problematic and require updates. It would as well drastically change the system but perhaps not fix the problem.
So a big stakeholder would still have their same influence. The only difference is in the example above. If a post was valued at $10 with 10 votes. One big stakeholder could vote and give over enough rewards to match the other voters on a consensus basis with less stake.
Now the reason Steemitocracy would need delegated steem is to give over votes to as well match the votes from the rest of the community on a consensus basis. In the event a post deserving of rewards to match the votes does not receive them. Steemitocracy issues a bonus token to make up the difference which is traded on its' own exchange for its own value. As to say it would be a smt token. All votes not received from steemit would get this token to match the value of their post at the market value of the post and the coin. As to say as many coins will be issued to bring your post up to speed. On the Steemitocracy website there is much more detailed information.
In closing, one of the main approaches to help deal with stakeweighted voting vs account based voting is community hives. Community hives is probably one of the best ideas presented. Unfortunately community hives may only do the same thing we're already doing now. Which is moreso.. conclave voting. We're in a big way already doing that.
If there is steem power allocated to these communities in equal portions that may help as well. The only issue i still would have even with communities judging and voting on their own accords as to who should receive which reward.
It would still not be a decentralized situation. Would it not be better for the consensus votes gathered by steemians to direct reward value at the same time allowing large stakeholders to keep their influence.
The problem is if we do nothing about stakeweighted voting is that this could result in an economic debacle where large rewards are focused in small areas. Unfortunately there is no model in history that shows any system or economic structure that works well in this way. Even if you dela on with a business model you still want to represent the majority of your consumer. The largest stakeholders only make up about 1% of steemit which is not a good model for a social network.
In addition to that. The Eos system is breeding massive competition with a large sum of money to creat social networks on their systems that deal more with equality of votes and not stakeweighted votes.
Even if the system fails this still presents a possible bad disruption in steem price and the steemit community. Which stil won't be good for us. The only viable solution i see is one which addresses the competition on the horizon. To do nothing and wait i feel is dangerous. So if anyone would like to support steem and protect against such possibilities. You can do so just by joining us. Obviously delegated steem is welcomed. We've written a letter to Ned to help us, but the main thing you can do to help doesn't require money. It just requires you joining us. You see the real value is in your attention and community. To have a strong community. It requires respect and a place veryone can come and feel like part of the community. Stakeweighted voting alone doesn't always present in the best way that idea. That is my suggestion i hope you all would join me on my crusade.
to do away with the ability to upvote your own post and comments
Earning on Steemit with exuberance by selecting a bid based bot for voting posts.
that will always be the case in a system like this. one could argue that musing.io is such a group. we are human after all. its natural that we band together in groups with others we feel comfortable around. the whole safety in numbers herd mentality. in such groups there will be voting on other members post. in fact there should be more votes given by those within the group to other members that votes from those that are outside of the group. this would be due to the fact that those within the group are more attentive to each other than to those who are outsiders. its like a group/troop of monkeys sharing fruit and picking the lice off each other.
shit i hope you understand what i'm trying to say. i have a bad habit of getting long winded and rambling on and on...
good reply. i think another thing that could or should bed one away with is the whole vote buying sca.....system(yeah lets call it a system). i know that that is a very polarizing topic. ether for it or against it. to me buying votes is just corrupting the trending list as well as draining the reward pool. i do however acknowledge that vote buying can be helpful for minnows. however the system can also lead to people half assing their post. yeah i know that is funny coming from me who has been called a shit poster.