The issue with curation incentives isn’t anything new. This is something I wrote...from nine months ago.
https://steemit.com/steemit/@ats-david/on-curation-rewards-and-their-necessity
For the record: I find the “it’s so much more profitable” argument to be quite poor, especially when it comes from whales who can earn fairly large returns by voting on nearly anything. And I find it a particularly horrible argument when they then try to claim that they’re only trying to prove a point or that they really do want to improve the platform/community. If you want more money than you’re getting, then just say that. Don’t try to qualify it by saying, “It’s not my fault, guys!”
Anyway - curation rewards may be part of the problem, but it isn’t the problem, or even one of the prominent ones today. There are much bigger issues...and the largest one (the stake issue - particularly, STINC’s enormous percentage) has still not been addressed. That alone likely has the largest and worst impact on interest, investment, development, and sentiment/behavior. To this day, they are still moving things behind the scenes and picking winners/losers on the platform.
What STINC=Steem.inc?
Yeah...colloquially speaking.
I saw the companies huge holdings of sp while tracking the voting farms on the block chain....the whole picture regarding profit and power is coming together for me, I can watch it happen on Steemit. It will be interesting how long the minnows will last as a food source, hence SMT...
I do not think minnows can last as a food source, since they are just skin and bones lol
About going back to higher curation rewards; repeating a comment here so you see it:
I'm not so sure. Given the current goings-on on Steemit, I think the most likely scenario will be that:
I don't think increasing the curator's cut will increase proper curating, it will just increase the rewards for those who vote for rewards only rather than for rewarding content they like.
I suspect all it would do is make the in-crowds and short-term ROI-seekers work slightly differently, while at the same time increasing the income of those who vote for profit and decreasing the rewards for content creators.
The long-term/short-term outlook of those with the big wallets is key here, not the percentages.
There's only one way to find out what would happen, so we could just try it, as long as it can be reversed when it doesn't work as intended. Nothing wrong with experimenting as long as you say beforehand what you will do with the outcome of the experiment.
And yes, the huge STINC stake is hanging over everything like a big, black cloud.
How large is it? maybe you could save half of hour of research?
I also think or better believe or even better hope, that once Steemit will split into small shards of communities with SMTs all of them building their own token distribution and adjusted reward mechanism all that voting in steemit will not matter that much anymore.
I took me a few weeks after finding about steemit to realise that the real value lies in Blockchain itself and not Steemit as a platform. I guess only time will tell.
Apart from that i keep my reward expectations low and i'm cool. So many smart, interesting, creative and kind people here that it alone surpass benefits from the rewards. All the knowledge i have gained from advises, tips, tuts is priceless.