I definitely agree with 75% to curators and 25% to authors. It allows for professional curators to theoretically earn enough to make a job out of it and if we had many career curators we might stop seeing so many bot systems and the authors would ultimately earn more.
A clear problem we are seeing is that people do not want to spend the time curating. Even the downvoting crowd goes off about how important Proof of Brain is and then thoughtlessly uses a downvote automation tool...
If we're going to do a "skin in the game" stake-weighted voting system let's do it right and make the risk/reward worth the investment.
Yep, agreed completely. Plus changing the curator/author split would likely make "policing" users less necessary. When someone is forced to give up half their vote value to a stranger, they tend to try and game it somehow to keep more for themselves. If that split was say 75/25 or even 80/20 I would think they would be more likely to vote a little more altruistically, though that is just an assumption on my part.
Agreed, what we have right now isn't it, hopefully we can get some changes without having to wait another year or two.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit