It is way too early to judge whether the voting system on Steemit is working - we really need 6 months of data. If in 6 months time there are a fair number of whales and an even larger number of dolphins to balance things out, there is no problem at all.
Think of the dolphins as the "middle classes" of the system. All nations with a big middle class are stable. The unstable nations are those with a very powerful 1% and a vast majority minnow class, and very few dolphins that can counteract the 1%.
Therefore the success of Steemit lies in creating as many dolphins in the next 6 months as possible.
I don't see this as possible with the current/projected growth of the platform. The number of new users grows much faster than the current wealth distribution rate, which will arguably only make the problem worse. The big issue right now is unfair visibility. Meanwhile the current "trending page" will always have a limited amount of spots. We need a more dynamical solution that scales with user growth.
If the whales actively took the time to distribute their votes far and wide, then it should be easy to create a large dolphin class that acts like a stabaliser in the system. The problem is some whales are putting short-term gain ahead of long term benefits and only upvoting a select few. Perhaps they think the platform won't last and they need to make as much short-term money as they can. Or perhaps they haven't thought long term at all (a lot of players are NOT strategic when it comes to the long term, but only respond to short-term stimulus).
Still, it could just not be enough. 20 users have 50% of the voting power. Even if they curated full time they might not be able to create enough dolphins.
You have the point, we need to construct that middle class, for example, i will invest in steem powers because n a few days of research i believe that this cryptocurrency an this platform have amazing potential :)
Amazing potential either way, but as far as exploit-ability, whales will always carry the weight and be able to reward themselves and their friends unfairly. Where do we move FORWARD from here with a solution?
The only problem is that 6 months is a very long time when it comes to startups like Steemit. I agree wholeheartedly that 6 months of data would be ideal to have enough data points to draw a more accurate conclusion.
The paradox in doing so is if some of these things get put off for 6 months the platform could very easily begin to compound the already existing issues we're trying to address. Look at how many complaints have been flying around since the beta reopened and that hasn't even generated a full month's worth of data to look at yet.