RE: Is The Linear Reward Model That @steemitblog Proposed, What @screenname Has Been Commenting About All These Months?
Correct indeed as far as I know what screenname tries to achieve. But, HF19 only talks about linear curve for rewards; but there will still be a very curvy curve for the vote order, early votes gets way more weight then later votes. I oppose to that as well; shall be regardless of time of vote, ie no weight on vote order. This allowe removal of the reverse auction, the first 30 minutes vote period with different behaviour. This reverse auction actually is a pure game element; meaning bots are created to try and vote at optimal time; maybe some individuals who have all the time of the world and like gaming and betting are part of playing this game as well; All with the goal to maximise curation rewards for their own pocket, nothing to do with voting for content the various gamers and bots do actually like since these bots and gamers don't read the posts and comments at all.
Correct and agree that we first have to implement the proposed changes, however I do not like game elements in the service since this benefits only a very few of us, since most of us simply does not have to the time to play the games.
To complete the story on the non linear vote order weight: The counter argument for keeping this non linear is the fact that when first voters have a higher weight, more people will start looking for good content. This is however a untested argument, since I think maybe some more people are looking for content that will get many dolphin and whale votes and try to be quicker with their vote so their rewards are higher, but this is not necessarily quality content or content the voters actually likes for some reason. But in the end, curation rewards are so much less than post rewards, therefore I think that mostly bots will compete. Then there is the argument that bots also have good things if you would call the voting part not so good. Bots have better filtering mechanisms to select interesting posts (maybe some of them indeed) then Steemit UI and maybe the bot developers develop more interesting stuff and it is good to get the developers some rewards for that. My arguments are: 1) the better filtering methods shall be part of Steemit UI and available to all of us directly from the core UI, and 2) monetisation by bot developers shall be done in a different way, eg sell the bot capabilities to the users and/or Steemit Inc sitting on a big pile of Steem shall pay for 3rd party development for features that for sure belong to the core part of Steemit UI; bots shall not be funded by us bloggers and curators since this is actually the world upside down, since these bots are actually reducing the changes for the manual curators to earn funds, so we finance the 'enemy' so to speak to become even stronger 'enemies'.