RE: Community Decisions to Establish Rules vs. "It's in the Code = LAW", and the Battle for Decentralization
Be honest: would you be making this post if the largest stakeholders all supported you consistently? Honestly. Would this post exist?
It seems to me that what you've experienced recently is indeed decentralization: a group of stakeholders supported you, and then a few others decided not to since they felt that you were enjoying a rather concentrated allocation of the rewards.
I'm extremely skeptical of the idea of this complaint coming from you if were to experience the centralized support of all of the large stakeholders on all of your posts.
On the contrary, within the confides of this post here, you would be rationalizing to us right now how it's good for the platform that your content gets rewarded by everybody.
I don't know anything about your situation, but if you're this hurt for money, then perhaps a GoFundMe page could help?
I am new here but have done a lot of watching and seeing how it works. If 4% of the output gets 98% of the reward, how does that work? The Peter Principle, Ortega y Gasset and the Self-Determination of Steemit
The hope of these thoughts is to better the platform, no individual. It cannot live with the system rewarding power as it does - there is only one direction for it to go and that is not what is meant to happen
I think the idea needs a bit of refinement.
But you are correct, that
would stem from the fact that 4% of users have 98% of the power I guess.
What can be done? I would love to know, I'm busting my head trying to think of a way that makes sense to everyone. There are valid points in your post.