Sort:  

The most obvious is powering down, transferring the coins, and then powering up to a different account to vote on the same content multiple times. That is mitigated with a power down schedule longer than active post lifetimes.

I think that the new feature where they extended active post lifetimes to 30 days is not used by many people and is pretty useless. If you look at rewards past the first payout period there is almost always nothing or very little amount. People forget about old posts. Also I think this features would actually encourage cheaters to vote for themselves because they can do so without getting the attention from the post being trending or visible to many people.

If this is the only requirement then in my opinion it would be worth removing this feature or reducing the life time of the post to shorten the power down period. The shorter the time lock period the more likely people will lock their coins and participate in curating.
I really don't see the point of a long lock time period if the inflation is reduced to a minimum

Actually the 30 day limit is itself very unpopular with authors. Most would want it longer. Perhaps if the advertising revenue model is successful authors will see that as a fair way to be compensated longer term in place of reader rewards, but that is all hypothetical at this point.

The 30 day limit is bad. Harms the platform overall.

Please read my comment to this post regarding other 'issue' with 12 week to power down.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.18
TRX 0.15
JST 0.031
BTC 60970.88
ETH 2634.17
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.59