but at the same time kind of sucks for the rest of us without heavily SP bloated accounts
There's a flip side to that coin. These accounts are reaping curation rewards because they're voting on stuff. What happens when high-SP accounts vote stuff up?
The curation rewards pool is a minority of the total rewards granted each day, and this is only 27% of that.
Long story short? Author rewards are more lucrative than curation rewards.
Is this not the way it was designed before you were brought in?
No point stating obvious network mechanics that shipped with the whitepaper. I believe the issue here is that berniesanders is trying to bring to light is that a large share of the curation rewards are being snapped up by Steemit Inc.
Yes, it's a tiny amount compared to author reward in comparison and I do see your point. But sadly it really isn't a point that makes the situation look any better or worse. :/
I think there is a point in stating the obvious here because the premise of this post seems to gloss over it. A third of curation rewards is simply not that much, in percentage or in real value. For the day in question it's about $3-400 in real dollars.
I don't think that warrants pitchforks, especially when the only alternative is to not curate.
Is that the real thrust of this post, that steemit staff should not vote on anything at all? That's an argument that has pros and cons, but I'm not sure if that's what's being made here or not.
Sure, At the current rates it's a piss in the bucket. I agree with that.
But if by some miracle we hit a mass adoption event and the network's worth sky rockets that 3rd of the curation rewards could be a considerable sum!
4% is 4%. It's simply not that important.
(PS: Those accounts hold 7% of stake, so they're being under-rewarded relative to their stake, presuming no author rewards.)
Nesting.
This comparison is totally unfair. According to this, authors should get zero.
Excellent point.