RE: Thoughts On 0.17 Proposals
but I'm sure that those using auto-votes will notice that their voting power is declining and should take the appropriate steps to adjust.
Even if they don't, vote power reduction carries its own penality in terms of each vote being worth less. The system reaches a natural equilibrium where anyone who votes more than the minimum amount has the same total vote power regardless of the number of votes cast.
With curation being only 25% as it is
In fact it is quite a bit less than that because of the early votes causing curation rewards to go to the author instead. (Also no curation rewards on 30 day payouts, but that is a small factor and one which would be undone by the proposed changes.)
I'm completely against having a separate rewards pool
I think I would favor a general flatting of rewards (say replacing N^2 with N log N everywhere), which would tend to increase the share going to comments without a need for a separate pool.
Agree on all points.
I have heard the N^2 argument several times lately and I think that would probably be the best way to handle things. It's certainly better than creating new pools, new voting power meters, and new incentives for spamming. That route just seems like it would make using the platform less intuitive anyway. It's already complicated enough for new users.
Good point on complicated.
Steemit should be simple to explain to people. That's key. If I tell someone about Steemit, and it's too complicated for me to put simply in a few sentences, the person won't trust it.
As a person in the sales business, the fact that simplicity is key is always hammered home every time we have trainings.