RE: Revisiting 50/50 curation
You know why those little accounts vote on it, encourage it? curation. they don't give a shit about the content.
So maybe we start them off with not having dust votes? That would be an alternative path we could take.
I will say that under the current system it is worth that, as the author in question paid out of pocket to get it that high, and a good chance the votes he paid for he actually saw a loss (rewarding those who are here for investment returns solely, and delegate to the vote bots). Which is the basis for increased curation POV, to give higher returns to investors.
I don't understand the mindset that thinks if you increase the revenue side of the vote bots it won't create more delegations as their slice of the pie gets bigger on the back end.
I don't see this as being about distribution, as it benefits lower SP accounts very minimally to nothing.
If people are of the nature to take the time and curate, guessing they already are. I don't see this mass exodus from the delegation renting for large stakeholders to suddenly sink a large time investment into curation if this comes to pass. They just get more cookies for what they already are doing.
No, he didn't. One of the fastest growing accounts on the platform if i remember.
It even benefits them more in curation as they will see higher returns there too. Have you looked at the earnings of where the distribution of Steem goes?
Very little of the voted blog content on Steem can't be found anywhere else and likely, better. The future of the platform isn't in blogging and voting alone - it is in the securing of the infrastructure to empower niche tokens to be the earning mechanisms. The content producers can earn undiluted tokens through the SMT, investors provide stability and Resource credits. there is a long-term process here, most are yet to understand it.
We are going in circles here and not seeing a meeting of minds.
Bottom line, the fastest way to growth here when one comes with zero to a little skin in the game rests for the most part in the author side. Curation, unless they jump on high payout posts as you used as an example, will pay them little to nothing as a dust vote is a dust vote. Nothing doubled is nothing. Currently to break the .02 vote threshold (if that is where dust ends) it requires 800 SP.
I recently looked into the author in question, and he is definitely using a lot of bots. Many of them seem to allow their bidding to go over the even point where those who bid take a loss. His use of them consistently ensures he is taking losses hoping ot make up for it from the visibility.
He is making enough on average from it to more than cover his sends as not many flag him anymore.
You don't seem to realize, as long as the post goes over 2 cents.. there is no dust level on curation which is why I can get:
Yes, the best way to earn here without a mass of stake is being an author - a good, engaging, author who delivers content that is in demand and well enough to be able to compete for attention and lure votes from people who are more incentivised to sell their vote. How many can do that here? Or, should all shit be rewarded regardless of whether anyone enjoys it or not?