Im with you on separating downvotes and flags.
Could curation rewards be the same for both?
If i downvote i still get 25% of my vote's value, perhaps more if others downvote, too?
This would remove most of the loss to downvoting.
I think you got some doublethinc occuring when you say capping whale votes in an n2 environment discourages holding large sp and then say to take away the inflation reward to holding large sp.
If the distribution is the problem, and you admit the n2 is better with a cap, then shouldnt we return to it and discourage holding large sp?
Honestly, who has 100k usd (100mv) to speculate on a blogging experiment?
Not Joe or Jane Average, for sure.
If mass adoption is the goal, then should we continue to favor those not in our target demographic?
We've already turned 800k of them away to go tell their friends we are bs.
Just sayin'.
If the whales want to improve distribution by selling, great.
If they want to push it down to a dime, even better.
Then less wealthy people could afford to buy some.
As a bonus, we get more sp when the price is lower.
I earned most of my sp when the price was under .25 and since the price topped two dollars i havent grown much at all.
Some of which i attribute to being very vocal about the abuse here, but the math works that way, too.
I get 10sp for a dollar at a dime, and half of one at two dollars.
You may be happy to know that were witness downvotes enabled your honesty in this post would have caused me to contemplate removing you from my list.
Having people who are rich hold steem is a good thing. I'm not goign to demonize people that have money. If we want to see higher steem prices, and I think generally speaking most people do we're going to need rich people to buy and hold steem. So, it's not double think. Discouraging people from buying and holding steem is bad for the platform. It'll lower price, slow growth, and not help expose this liberating platform to more people.
You don't actually get more SP when the price is lower. Your post rewards have an ability to go higher if steem price is higher. How much SP you get is relative to the price so it does scale back some with higher prices, but you still make more on a post with high Steem price.
Im for all economic classes holding steem, i simply think valuing the richest over our target demographic, the average, is counterproductive.
We can see that letting the large accounts have most of the rewards leads 93% of new accounts to abandon the game.
If mass appeal is our goal, this aint it.
Price is going to be a trade off.
More incentive to buy in will put upward pressure on the price.
Do we want to appeal to those with more than 100k usd (100mv) to speculate, or do we want to encourage those with less to have a reason to invest?
I suggest that it is those with less.
If we want steem to be adopted as currency we need lots of adoption.
Currently 800k newbs havent come back, that is a clue.
If investing 1k usd has less impact because of the whale sp's advantage in the math, who would do that?
Again, being against a vote cap and for taking away interest to target the largest accounts is contradictory.
Is 'stake based' interest somehow favoring large accounts?
Do large accounts get a larger share just for being large, or is the interest i get the same as a percentage?
Do we both get 1% more, or do large accounts get 2% and small accounts 1%?
For clarity, once we have enough dolphins, and not solely whale/bidbot created golden boys, the cap (Id suggest 100mv, as a community decision and not in the code) can be increased to allow larger investments to benefit more from curation.
But until rewards are allowed to grow these dolphins, allowing the whales/vote selling bots to suck it all up to give to their sycophants/customers is decimating adoption.
A higher price gives more usd value, but less steem.
This early in the game id rather have more steem.