You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Growing Steem to its full potential
proxy voting... investors could outsource the voting to “power users” who in turn get a cut of the rewards.
Proxy voting could also centralize the platform even more, if you look at bitshares for example there are some voters that hold more than 5% of the total amount of votes available, the same thing could happen here if someone gets a lot of proxy votes to his account then he will become a whale while the users who proxy to him will have no incentive to use steemit, they would just sit and wait for returns...
You have a point, but there is one problem... Passive investors do sit and wait for returns. That is just what they do. Does that mean we don't want passive investors in STEEM? Is it not better then, that they have the opportunity to power active curators and growing the community?
The percentage split in reward could be debated. However, a free market negotiation between curators and investors should be able to determine the best split. It is actually just like hiring curators, and the "salary" would be determined by negotiation. Why shouldn't investors be able to decide how to best use their STEEM power?