RE: Voting Abuse and Ineffective Curation: A proposal for blockchain-level change
Well said. Increasing the value of the STEEM token may, ultimately, be the best way to spread more real value around to the most number of people. I also think it's important to make it valuable to power up STEEM because DPOS relies on powered up STEEM to make it expensive for someone to come in and take over enough witness spots to push through a fork the community doesn't want. It people aren't incentivized enough to hold Steem Power, that would mean it would theoretically be easier to attack the network (I track witness voting engagement on my monthly report which relates to that as well).
but I think that's fair.
As a massive holder of Steem Power would say... hahah! ;)
I've never powered down since I've been here, so I would certainly like Steem Power holders to be rewarded more as well.
What are your thoughts about phasing something in over time instead of jumping right to 50/50?
Something I'd really love to see is more big data type analysis on the STEEM blockchain and how rewards are being distributed. Ideally, I'd love for us to have simulators where we could replay the blockchain under different rules and see how distributions change. Obviously, user behavior would change as well when the economic motivations change, but I still think it might give us some hints about how changes may impact things overall.
This is the first time I've heard a witness discuss this. I bring it up, and am brushed off. At least I know there is awareness of the issue amongst competent witnesses now. Thank you.
That would be amazing!
Is there a possibility that communities might be able to vary parameters? I expect that it will be done with SMT's.
Thanks!
I'll be looking at how rewards are being distributed, probably at some point in the next few days (although not with simulations yet!). I'm slowly trying to build up an overall picture of the Steem financial environment based on analysis of the blockchain data.