You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Self-voting user list since HF19 - PART 3 (potential comment abuse)
Interesting, but why would people delegate to it? It seems that would cause just the same resentment and division between 'community members' who delegate for the good of the platform, and those who don't out of self-interest, figuring they can better use their SP for profit.
The system can be change to have any agreed restrictions on the blockchain logic I guess, but only where there's a will.
People that aren't exclusively interested in making a profit would delegate because they see the long term benefits of addressing this with the mechanism that is in place for these issues.
The system can be changed, that is not the point. The point is how.
There is not enough SP in the hands of people who would support it, to achieve what, ironically, @smooth and @abit did with "The Experiment", on this issue. To be precise, they are the very core target we would probably be dealing with. I'm starting to see why berniesanders has been working hard to raise the collective share of the minnows to a level where as a group, they can start to fight back against this monopoly, but, honestly, if you ask me, it's a hopeless cause.
I haven't been around long enough to know about 'The Experiment', I'd need to read about it.
@abit and @smooth set up a bot to automatically downvote whale votes, to show what happened to the rewards pool and especially minnow rewards. It was a resounding success.
Pretty ironic that even with figures like 50% of comment rewards going to upvotes that both of these two are major objects of resistance against a rule change of any kind.