RE: Steemit has problems. I have The Grand Solution.
Not at all. Users are untouched in this idea, they continue doing whatever they please with the same power they always had. This is purely focussed on the top, like, 20 individuals with millions and millions of steem who are selling their power for spammers to give themselves $40 a post, 7 times a day.
Rather than put their power into the hands of irresponsible spammers, instead give it to trusted, democratic and public teams whose actions can be easily scrutinized, which also spreads that wealth of the top 20 among the common community, rather than the pockets of those with a bit of cash to spend on vote buying.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
Well, the platform isn't all about beauty, and quality is subjective. I spent months on here writing huge, high quality scientific posts, some of which took the better part of a day to construct and research, all for 3 or 4 cents. Not everybody has the perseverance or joblessness that I do to keep plugging away with multi-hour posts for nothing in the hope that they might earn $10-15 6 months from now.
However with the curation teams I'm in, new users who may just be introducing themselves are getting $20 or more, some who find the steemSTEM tag jump right in on $30-60 and knowing they have the right stuff for curation, are pushed to make good content and earn that money every time they post. Totally different to what I 'grew up' with on here.
The more curators, the more recognition - nobody needs to sell anything to get there, but the option for a little extra boost (premium service) is there if a user is particularly passionate about their work
In this reply, you completely neglect to mention that the delegators will receive no return (except capital gains), unless they post quality content and pay for premium service.
Do you expect @freedom to start blogging? @tamim to post anything more original than verses from the Koran?
I don't see it. It's as fruitless for those accounts as delinking SP from VP, and creates yet another mitigation of a mitigation of... you get the point.
Again I think you misunderstand the premise. Whales don't post. They charge a premium to small minnows, say $10 for a bigger upvote on that minnow's post, if it meets the quality requirements. I've already done a back of the envelope calculation that could give blocktrades a $360,000 return annually, and that's just one example.
but to be clear, the curation goes on for free regardless, boosted by the delegation handed out by those whales, who only sit back and get rewarded
Ah! Tyvm for the concise clearing up of my misconceptions.
So, whales still sell upgoats, albeit 'potential' upgoats, for cash. The upgoats, and payments, are handled by the curation team. Whales then attain to a portion of the curation rewards, based on their % of the delegated SP held by the curation team, or are directly contributing their upgoat for direct payments, as well as a slice of curation rewards?
Or no slice of curation rewards?
Not sure I presently up to speed completely, but perhaps zeroing in, at least.
Well, I was to put curation rewards straight to the curation teams, but that could be a thing, depends on the calculations I suppose. Previously I worked out the premium service was more than enough to keep whales happy. Curators could also be 'paid' by getting guaranteed upvotes on their own content, providing it also passes the requirements.
Thanks for clearing that up well!