You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Distributing Wealth Should Be Equally Profitable
Test #4: remove self-voting.
Bid bots have become an omni-present thing thus there will still be self-enriching but people will have to network - or share - more in order to maintain their own revenue levels (bots don’t need 50% curation btw, they already spread the largest amounts of SP daily - for pay!). Add to this an element that VP recovers slower if consistently not maxed out over a period of x days and curation, even if automated, will become a bigger element. Even curation by those who now curate less.
Much like with Digg 3’s karma it could even be made that consistent votes from the same backers become less influential over time (opportunity to burn SP to null here).
there's just no way to eliminate self-voting.. just bot up a number of accounts. hence i'm working with the absolute minimum effort here. at least those giving out votes / curating should earn more.
I don’t think we should make it a fact, or at least try to imply, that multiple accounts is the default future if no self-voting. That’s saying that law offenders are the default stance. Multiple accounts is something reserved for the internet pro, something usually promoted also by the internet pro - those who always need to promote themselves and like/RT/upvote themselves in order to give themselves more traction.
There aren’t many places in life where it’s possible to (financially) reward one’s own efforts and making that a de facto right seems just... wrong. Or at least feels wrong.
Jane and Joe Average usually only have multiple accounts because for some reason they got locked out of their email address and inevitably also lost their account password. Early adopters and internet pros still aren’t the median demographic.
The argument that those curating should earn more is actually funny as well. Why should somebody liking something earn the same as the creator? To me it seems smarter to penalise those who do not participate to the wealth distribution.
As far as I’m aware earning (proof of brain) is the unique marketing element and as such we should make that new economy happen. That should focus on distribution of rewards, not on “do I get high enough a return” from rewarding. We’re trying to rewrite the uniqueness here.
Let’s not, let’s instead focus on how we can improve quality and reward that. Not by one self.
Remember that the better the wealth distribution works, and thus possible social vertical mobility, the more valuable the stakes held will become. That’s ultimately the reward for investors. Investors, at least those we want and need, should have a long term focus. 5-8 Years before return.