RE: Call to bot owners to block top 50 rewarded authors!
I am going to assume you have not read the whitepaper, otherwise you wouldn't have made that statement.
In the white paper in the subsection named voter abuse under the section voting to distribute the currency (I believe thats what its called, could be wrong but I am going off of memory) it states something along the following:
If a large stakeholder is abusing their voting share than many smaller shareholders can work together to nullify the rewards.
It also says in that section (above this) that negative-voting (downvote/flag) is there to stop such abuse such as: collusive voting, self-voting, etc.
It is really a good read for the hypothetical situation at what steem was intended to be and you should probably read it. I mean, steem is a lot different than what was initially planned but still. Even still it is a good read!
No, they can't, a 50.01% share of the stake would be invincible. Nothing you said negates his point.
No whale has 125 million SP, many would fight to prevent a whale from getting 125 million SP.... As well, due to how rewards are given, if a whale had 125 million SP... His vote would be worth around $1, why? Because the reward pool would be gone.
You have some errors in your basic assumptions of how the reward pool works.
First of all, currently no single user holds greater than 50% of the active state, if however a group worked together to hold greater than 50% than sure they can't be stopped but his question referred to a single user. So now we look at the largest active user and see how much it would take for them to hold greater than 50% of the active stake, well since the reward fund is not able to supply that they would have to first drain the reward fund to nothing in order to get greater than 50% and considering others will be gaining a profit at the same time (such as other whales) you can determine an approximate rate at which it will drain and find the rate at which the top whale is growing proportional to the rest and extrapolate to find the 50% mark... that mark comes after the 100,000,000 SP point nearing the 125 million SP in total and will require the user to constantly drain the reward pool..... making votes worthless (value of a vote is directly proportional to amount in the reward fund)
And that requires that all users blindly accept such behavior.... No whale on this platform is that fucking stupid... but are you? Anyone that gives any of a flying fuck about their own rewards would not let anyone grow that fast....
Anyways, with this I conclude you have some errors in your assumptions on the reward pool.... Come back to me when you figure out the math behind this
If 51% of the voting power is self-voting, 49% can choose to vote for itself and receive 49% of the reward pool, or waste their VP and flag the 51% whale. The whale would come out with a 2% edge, and reap 100% of the reward pool. The reward pool is a fixed amount.
You talking about something completely different doesn't somehow make what we are saying wrong, it just shows that you enjoy talking at length about hypotheticals that no one cares about.
No it isn't, the reward pool is dynamic.
When you receive a reward, it drains out of the reward fund... When a witness mints a block, some steem is added to the reward fund... The reward fund is not static. As well, the whale would not, in that case, get 100% of the reward fund, they will just hold 100% of the recent reward pool payouts...
So they get 100% of the money, but not 100% of it? That makes little sense. Many people have gone for this approach to stop big companies. None have succeeded. The power we have is in creating a fairer alternative to steemit.
If I were the only person to make a steemit post one day, or week, and I was the only person to vote and I upvoted it, I wouldn't earn the entire reward fund and if nobody else was posting or voting, its likely the coin would have died and therefore the SBD/Steem ration would be so low (due to a dead coin and the steem price dying) that my vote would be worth nothing... However I would earn 100% of the rewards rewarded for that set period of time.
It doesn't matter what all the other posts are voted to right now, the predicted value of vote is based on the amount of steem in the reward fund at the time of the vote and again at payout, along with a 3 days average for the price of steem... and so much more.
In a situation where 1 person owns 51% of all of the steem, yes it would be way better to flag their vote but its not like flagging prevents you from posting.... For instance if they post 10 things a day and upvote all to 100, I could post 1 thing, upvote it to 100 then flag his 10 posts at once (which will use around 19.92% of your VP) and since the value of his vote will decrease you could still coordinate a flag to drop the posts to 0 as their VP will decrease as well,
If they also flag then their VP will drop too, if they wait between posts then voting 10 times can use more VP than voting 11 times at 100%.
“First of all, currently no single user holds greater than 50% of the active state, if however a group worked together to hold greater than 50% than sure they can't be stopped but his question referred to a single user.”
And secondably, I know you're the big marriage expert. Oh. I'm sorry. I forgot. Your wife is dead.