RE: Downvote me if you can't
How is this unfair?
There is definetely some distribution issue. It is unfair because as the price of steem increases new users will have to pay a higher price to get the same influence as early adopters. Late adopters will clearly be at a disadvantage.
Even if steem was perfectly evenly distributed today, the problem would still be there because as time goes by and price increase the power will concentrate within a few hands ( the early adopters). There are 2 problems with this, the first is that all users won't be able to start on a level playing field . The second problem is that as the user base grow and power concentrate there will be less and less eye balls to curate content. If you want everyone on the platform to get some visibility by influential curators you need a lot of them. Even bots would be overwelmed, they would not be able to keep up with the amount of content coming in.
Curation guilds could somehow solve these issue but the problem with these guilds is that they don't encourage people to want to buy steem power and gain influence in the system.
It really is not an easy problem to fix but that's where the brain power of the developers should focus, these are issues that will come in the road ahead.
I wrote a post about this recently https://steemit.com/steemit-ideas/@snowflake/what-if-i-told-you-i-ve-uncovered-a-top-secret-community-this-community-is-so-secretive-that-if-you-want-to-work-your-way-up-its
Why should those who join in afterwards get as much reward as early adopters? We are beta testers in here. We are risking a lot of our time and some quite a bit of money and we do and have helped refine the system , it could come to nothing.
This is not a "basic income" project. it is business. Crypto people are inspired by mises not marx. To be exact, steem is in fact a framework for ad hoc enterprise integration and communication. an attractor, infrastructure kickstart. an experiment with unconventional smart contracts that model corporate democracy. A censorship resistant journalism platform...
not (just) redistribution. new steem gets distributed quite fairly when you look at it. very fairly compared to fiat or even bitcoin. we even influence development, as well as get paid.
Not as much reward, as much chance to work their way up to the top.
well I came in 7/20 and I made it to the top.. everybody can make it..
Everybody can? That's just silly. Hardly anyone can make it to the top. That's what makes it the top.
Steem is like a game, where you need power to gain influence. This is the thing that will attract people to steemit. Imagine you play wow and all the early users have much better life power, wow gold and weapons when they start than you did and its going to be much harder for you to get to where they are. Do you think people would play that game? the vast majority won't bother with a game that discriminate them.
You managed to make it to the top through posting, I was refering to people making to the top by actually buying steem power. It's funny how people who don't invest real money but invest their time seems to think the money is raining from the sky :) My point is you need people buying steem power to sustain the platform and this ain't going to happen if users don't start on a level playing field.
I'm not a crypto person, but I wanted to take the opportunity to praise Marx and hate on Mises.
I can't remember whose post I put it on, but I actually had the idea of resetting everyone's score to zero after 24 hours. Earnings could be accumulated through posts, comments and upvotes every day. Active users and participants being rewarded based on "esteem" levels. It gives everyone an even playing field and their potential earnings would coincide with their efforts.
Interesting. I keep my mouth shut on all this stuff, because as you know in my chats w you or comments, I am newer to a lot of this and know my place. I am still learning my way in crypto and this is not just a blogging/social network, it combines so many factors.