Why can't we cap the power? Let's assume all the Whales and Orcas voluntarily decided it was in the best interest of Steem to cap the voting power. This would immediately place many thousands of Steemit accounts on an equal footing with regards to disbursement of the rewards pool with the possibility of many more being within reach of that level. Perhaps the whales and orcas perceive that to be in their best interests. STEEM at $1000
Never assume. 2.) We can not cap the power because communism always fails and nobody invests in something not seen as free market. 3.) Whales will simply diversify into multiple acounts and game the system at advantage to normal investors without knowledge of blockcahins or code.
Bingo. This. But most of all...yiu are SPOT ON when u say people will simply make extra accounts (like most krakens already have..because people like smooth and abit who not only have big whale accounts, but ALSO witnesses...are the real issue here).
Sure you can ASK people to voluntarily do it (like im basically doing...which is to severely cut back my voting max % on nearly everything), but all this means ...kind of like in the gun debate...that those who DONT voluntarily drop their voting power will simply earn more voting power in the system than those good hearted people (who are prob best to give extra sp to in the long run).
Thank God for my idea and a friend building it. It will fix alot of this crappy aspect of this amazing platform.
Making changes that make sense for the success of Steem is not communism . 3) There may be ways to encourage large accounts to remain that way. There needs to be an investor class that cannot use extreme influence in the day-to-day disbursement of the reward pool. In fact, multiple account might be better than that....even though the influence amounts to the same.
Actually the big guys would simply split their account into multiple accounts below that limit, and keep voting business as usual. So there would be a short time effect during the time it took for them to power down and create multiple accounts.
Stupid to artificially limit voting power as more than an experiment without giving some very attractive reason someone in power would want to be above the voting limit. They would need some other benefit that is unique to being that powerful to offset it.
Why do you say that...if not a joke? :)
cant cap the steempower's power. can cap an idividual posts payout based on the marketcap at a rolling ceiling
Why can't we cap the power? Let's assume all the Whales and Orcas voluntarily decided it was in the best interest of Steem to cap the voting power. This would immediately place many thousands of Steemit accounts on an equal footing with regards to disbursement of the rewards pool with the possibility of many more being within reach of that level. Perhaps the whales and orcas perceive that to be in their best interests. STEEM at $1000
Bingo. This. But most of all...yiu are SPOT ON when u say people will simply make extra accounts (like most krakens already have..because people like smooth and abit who not only have big whale accounts, but ALSO witnesses...are the real issue here).
Sure you can ASK people to voluntarily do it (like im basically doing...which is to severely cut back my voting max % on nearly everything), but all this means ...kind of like in the gun debate...that those who DONT voluntarily drop their voting power will simply earn more voting power in the system than those good hearted people (who are prob best to give extra sp to in the long run).
Thank God for my idea and a friend building it. It will fix alot of this crappy aspect of this amazing platform.
Making changes that make sense for the success of Steem is not communism . 3) There may be ways to encourage large accounts to remain that way. There needs to be an investor class that cannot use extreme influence in the day-to-day disbursement of the reward pool. In fact, multiple account might be better than that....even though the influence amounts to the same.
Actually the big guys would simply split their account into multiple accounts below that limit, and keep voting business as usual. So there would be a short time effect during the time it took for them to power down and create multiple accounts.
Stupid to artificially limit voting power as more than an experiment without giving some very attractive reason someone in power would want to be above the voting limit. They would need some other benefit that is unique to being that powerful to offset it.