You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: How To Fix Steemit For Communities & Viral Engagement
One person / one vote / system working as intended
Maybe, but influence as a function of SP is also intended, both as a significant part of the value of SP, giving a reason to buy it, and also because those who have made more of an investment (in contributions of valued effort and/or money) are more entrusted with influence. In that sense, the system might be working too well at the moment (or at least the whale critics would claim).
There certainly is a system where one person one vote is the intent, but this isn't it. Could that be changed? Possibly, but probably better to just build one with that intent from the start.
Actually I can't think of how to design such a system if the money is taken from a shared pool that is charged to the collective.
The only design I can think of which is one-user-one-vote and doesn't devolve into either a winner-take-all Sybil attack (which is even the case when votes are free such as on Reddit) or no curation at all due to optimum monetary strategy of voting for yourself always, is tipping from your own funds, which has been shown numerous times to not work psychologically.