Entering prohibited

This post has declined payout
Some things have come a certain point for me lately. SteemIt is a great innovation, blogging on a blockchain, a social media platform on Graphene blockchain technology. And along the way I've come across some major issues, as seen from my point of view. Things like Steem Power attached to voting, in effect risking the creation of an oligarchic control system.

And according to some this is needed because otherwise there is the risk of a botnet controlled oligarchy. Due to a flaw in the mining part of Steem on Graphene. Where rogue accounts can mine thousands of 'zombi' accounts, to be controlled by a single programme. I've read somewhere about one trying to sell 30.000(!) 'zombies', at one dollar per bot. So there seems to be a real dilema. Because endless new accounts can be created by those who know how to, voting stays attached to Steem Power. Either way having the risk of forming an oligarchy in practise. And I think both will lead to a negative spiral movement. Steem down in price, to just a few cents worth, at the most. Also less account contributing to the community. Meaning less curation, less posting and so on.

It is all about value created by attracting attention

A massive 'zombi' voting botnet would lead to an extreme value drop for Steem. That could be a scenario happening if voting was to be detached from Steem Power. But that is due to a system flaw which makes automated mass account creation possible. Now that seems to be partly fixed through account verification. Allthough I notice that it is still possible to get it done externally, so the automated mass account 'mining' still seems to be wide open. So, then it will be difficult to detach Steem Power from voting. But then there is another bias that is driven by large Steem Power holders, with the risk of an oligarchy forming.

Accounts that have a low value of Steem Power have no real input with their vote. And cannot earn with their curation. So most of them probably get stuck in a low reputation profile. No matter how talented they are. And I know there are good innitiatives that want to change this for the good. Supported by the developers. That shows how difficult it is to create a really fair head start system, that is secured from botnet attacks rigging the system too. It is the choice between two strategies that both have their pros and cons.

And I think I get the dilema. Maybe there lies the way into the future, I really don't know anymore at the moment. While I can understand the choice of binding voting to Steem Power, I also see the downsite of that choice. Because it might lower the amount of new posts, the growth of real contributing(!) accounts and therefore lower the attention attraction. That would be the economical factor that has an influence on the Steem market price developement. Or to state it more blunt, it could bring the price of Steem down to about a cent. So there are real challenges ahead for the developers, the content creators and curators. And as we all are Steem Power stakeholders, it is of importance to all of us here at SteemIt.

More strict limited voting and posting mandatory

It is just some wild ideas. Posting mandatory, before being able to vote, for instance. Some may dislike this. Because, how would their community serving botnet still be able to work. Yes, I see there is a challenge in that. So, a block function might be needed. Where the blocking account can stop the blocked account from reading, replying, up- and downvoting, following and so on. But then that would need to come with consequences for the blocking account too, to prevent abuse. Like dropping of reputation if more that a certain amount of accounts were blocked within a certain amount of time. It could be known as Blocking Reserve. Also working like a capacitor. Taking 5 days to fully recharge.

You see, I'm not here just to point out to things that I have my doubts about. Because I still believe that the Graphene Blockchain Technology has a lot of potential and thus SteemIt too. Graphene 2.0 will prove that even more, so even if SteemIt will have to deal with a Steem pricedrop then that is absolutely not the end of it. But I'm convinced there is a lot of room left for improvement, even easing out the drop within a few weeks time. It is 'Beta' and keeping an open mind is the best way to do. Also sharing ideas how to improve the SteemIt experience. Attracting attention seems to fuel the economy that gives value to this social media platform. That is what could get pure investors in.

Pure investors could be given the choice to resign from curating and posting. Still being able to trade for instance. Any non-voting account could be non-posting by choice. And when an account tries to up- or downvote it could be made mandatory that at least one post had been made. Now this mandatory rules could be adjusted to defend the community from rogue accounts and havoc causing botnets. New accounts could maybe post right away, but their voting (curation) power will only be full 99.99 after 5 days. With the verification need this might make the whole network stronger. And at some point even make holding Steem Power less of a dominant factor in the voting system.

Reputation could become a weighting factor in voting strength. And maybe the slider should show that it is about 'Steem Power voting'. There also could be a concequence attached to using all 100% Steem Power voting. That it would have bigger impact on the voting reserve. Full 100% Steem Power vote, a drop of 20% relative to the amount of Steem Power that is held. Meaning that accounts with low Steem Power could vote with 100% more often, and lose less voting strength every time they do. In the mean time the voting strength would work like a capacitor. Rebuilding in 5 days time. This would mean curating takes more effort and strategy. Making it more difficult for 'zombi' bot networks to auto-vote. It will be a new challenge for the programmers of automated voting.

And how many blogs or replies could a human on average make in a days work? Many of my posts take about 3 hours to make, including re-editing that is needed sometimes. And for comments to make, on a non self made post, would take time to read, and then to comment. So where maybe between two or four posts a day could be written, a certain amount could be read. There will be statistics available that can help improve the overall usage of SteemIt. By applying these limits into the system of posting and curation. That could also help to keep roque 'zombi' bot networks out of causing havoc.

Maybe I should have kept pandora's box closed

There is a lot of room for improvement and this is a post that is just about that. Starting with some questions that were lingering inside my head for a while. And I needed to find some kind of peace of mind. This could be seen as lifting the lid of Pandora's box, and at a certain point I wondered if I maybe had done so. But now I'm at my third blog post today I'm convinced that it is okay. Being concerned means that I care. That is part of my involvement here at SteemIt. No matter what is coming next.

And the price of Steem? Well, my guess would be that it will ease out in a couple of weeks time. And it will pick up again after that. For me it is still hard to tell, my crystal ball stated it depends on how SteemIt will evolve in the next few weeks. When my last recent payouts are all in I will Power Up. That is a positive side to the low price of Steem, it makes it tempting to get more Steem Power.

This third blog item of today I still keep at Decline Payout. Although I will do some upvote to see what the effect of that is. (Normally I would not upvote my own posts.) For today I still have one post to go. This one will complete my trial with Decline Payouts for today.

Have a good one!