Also, no matter what your stake is worth, if you're diluting the metric data of the platform, you're engaged in sybil attack. People are farming curation rewards right now with sybil methods. Denying this is to ignore what's going on.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
All voting is stake weighted. Whether they have 1 account with 100 STEEM or 100 accounts with 1 steem the potential rewards are the same. I actually believe there is a slight bias toward having it all in one account.
Our mathematical analysis of the system shows no advantage to sybil. It does manipulate the display ranking for "voted" sort order. We will probably remove that due to sybil issues.
How about the curation rewards gained from multiple accounts each with 100 STEEM, as opposed to one account with 100 STEEM? The person with 100 accounts benefits more, long term, and can manipulate rewards more heavily for other users, long term.
And the fact that it does dilute the metric data of the platform, should be a huge concern for Steemit, inc. The trending page for example should be ordered by real metric value, as it's not a fair representation of what the people are actually interested in. The trending page, as of right now, is a representation of individual value, not collective value, which is what "trending" means; the community, as a whole, is interested in it.
didn't I already explain this to you the other day
Curation rewards are also stake weighted and offer no advantage for dividing accounts and actually give slight advantage for merging funds into on account.
It shows what stakeholders, as a whole, are supporting.