@jerrybanfield show me a whale that makes an annual 100% ROI of their Steem Power, he/she would be a genius :D
But that all aside, why would any shareholder recieve any posting rewards in the first place ?
This is a good point, the underlying reason is that votes are weighted by Steem Power, which is a good or bad thing, depending on how you see it ;)
This is quite a philosophical debate I guess, coming back to the reward curve my initial thought is that n^2 would not really solve the "issue".
Other than that especially whales should be encouraged to vote on good content so that it attracts better content, so that their stake becomes more valuable.
100% agree, at the end of the day I want steemit to be a successful social media network and a successful crypto currency :)
Well then check out @lichtblick.
Posts flowers everyday, trades votes and has one of the highest reps on steemit by now.
He even agrees that his content is shit and he just posts something, so he can vote on it.
Easily made more than 100% ( in vests ) since hf18.
Trust me: n^2 could have potentially solved this issue.
If you don't make it a philosophical question whether posting rewards should be for good posts or for stakeholders, then it's pure game-theory;
Posting rewards for stakeholders without good content would be abuse, because it tries to play the rules.
The solution also comes through game-theory: n^2.
If you don't trust me, listen to @dan who invented this whole thing here and basically writes the same.
I am not as smart as him, but came to the same conclusions.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thx, I will think about it ;)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit