Curation is a large account game, it means very little to most of our users.
Curation is one reason that should incentivize people to have a stake in this system. And I hope you do realize, that large stakeholders, who are not selling, are allowing small accounts to benefit from the system.
We had everything in this mix before and it didn't matter. minus a downvote pool.
That's why we need all 3 combined.
As you'll soon note from my votes on this comment, that downvote pool will just be gamed. You're a gamer, and probably looking for ways to profit from said downvote pool.
The fact is that most people cannot pile stake into Steem, because they don't have it. Your stake immunizes you and enables you to profitably ignore this reality. You do so to the detriment of society, for your own profit.
I consider your facility with financial manipulation potentially beneficial to the community with the right incentives in place to encourage your profiteering to promote improvement of the investment vehicle that creates capital gains. This is why I propose replacing your current business model with dividends from funding development. You're agile. You'll quickly maximize your returns from new incentives that don't degrade curation and the market for Steem. The only reason you do that now is that the incentives make that the most profitable business model today.
We need to change the incentives that drive you to benefit the community, rather than continuing to degrade our market as you do today.
Yes, if you don't give me a reason to vote for content I consider good rather than my own, I'll just vote my own
Now you can't give me 100% curation or there's no reason for anyone to create good content. So that's why we need the other measures. I need not just more incentive to vote others, but a deterrence to vote myself (or sell my votes). That's where some free downvotes come in.
A little bit of converging linear curve brings all profitable spam into the light to get downvoted.
Every measure helps but have diminishing returns and increasing costs. That's why a combination of measures is best, it provides the maximum utility, assuming we get the numbers in the right ballpark
I can no long bother to explain to you the incentive to downvote is the value of your stake.
If no one has put that together yet watching the price and current activity. Nothing is going to teach them.
Yes, by the way, I fully understand that the stakeholder's INVEST in the end users to make the whole thing work.
I can no long bother to explain to you the incentive to downvote is the value of your stake.
So what's your reasoning for not using your downvotes?
I use around 10 percent of my stake for downvotes normally recently less, because I have massive burn out and am considering get out entirely. What is your reasoning?
He's entirely focused on financial maximization, and the present downvote mechanism reduces his profit. When some mechanism makes returns from downvotes profitable, he'll become the most egregious downvoter on the platform.
yes they are leaving something to the small people to hope for and by doing so keep this place with at least some number of users. so they are thinking abut the greater good or thinking that they will benefit in the long run. one that are not doing that are thinking just about themselves, they never build their sp to reward others, and are here for here and now.
Posted using Partiko Android