Well that's the balance. They have to predict what will be popular, that isn't popular already. If they see it should be worth more then it makes sense for them to vote on it. So if you are already popular I don't really see that as a worry.
Also, big picture: if the reward pool is being used more efficiently, then it is producing value and everything will be worth more. So it really is hard to say.
This is how i feel after reading everything. :D
But honestly, i really dont want to lose what i have now. I dont use bots and i work hard on my content. I see someone say i will have my rewards reduced by 40% and i cant feel happy with that.
Even you write about what is popular what is not, what is efficient and what is not but i only know for sure that i will have reduced earnings. :(
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I can't say that that's true "for sure". But I also can't deny that it's possible. But the efforts to adjusts incentives is an honest one, and it's just not accurate when people paint it as "stealing from the poor" or "stealing from the authors".
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It is not stealing because how reward pool functions but it does look like "changing where river flows."
Oh well we will see how it goes. ☺
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In the original HF21 article I read, there was the comment that 50/50 is not good enough, it should be Curators 80% and authors 20%, but it is better we do not do it now, let everyone get used to the reduced rewards and at the next HF go for it.
It is just like the outside world. The Big Tech mentality is alive and well in here.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That is a very bleak future you see. I will wait a bit and see what happens. I dont think those that proposed the system would want to destroy their own investment.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
They can, but they still lose compared to now with the new rules. There's a lot of shifting that will happen especially with 50/50 and dealing with the leakage to external curation votes, and incentives to move away from bid bots, and the potential downvotes is even more motivation. Yes, they'll do their best, but they are actually being penalized compared to now.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
And how do you imagine they will be getting 40% more? These principles already take into account maximizing behaviors. Unless you tell me the top X whales all agree to indiscriminately downvote everyone else, which I highly doubt. If you are a whale, and are just playing maximization, your incentive is to downvote other highly valued posts, presumably made by another whale, rather than small fish.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit