RE: Proof of Good Governance
You mean stake weighted voting is causing an imbalance? I do agree. It’s like scrabble where every time you create a word you get to play the next turn with more letters (than the seven letters you used to be permitted per turn). New players show up but can never catch those who began earlier who win more and more easily. Unlike n^2, players in linear at least don’t win more and more easily. Nevertheless, to counter this “imbalance” I am working on identity driven Oracles in SMTs to enable token systems that are analogous to scrabble games where everyone begins on equal footing, has the same number of letters to play each turn and the game ends/starts over predictably.
Contributed from my iPhone. Please excuse grammatical mistakes and errors.
Nice strategy @ned. Explore the promise of the original sandbox through blueprints of autonomous extensions (SMT) without unduly interfering with the status quo - a good tack.
Sounds good! Where is the official website for SMT? I am wondering if there is some kind of airdrops.
https://smt.steem.io/
I don’t know if you’re already familiar with Steemify but reading in your comment, your contribution coming from an iPhone, perhaps you might be interested in a dedicated notification app for iPhone users only called Steemify, we as @blockbrothers build this app. Just download it for free and never miss out on any notification anymore!
Every your comment = one $iPhone.
I am only in my infancy of understanding crypto and steemit, but I am learning more and more daily, thank you for contributing!
I think preventing large stakeholders from being able to "win" easily is much less critical than making sure they only win when the whole community wins. A longer vesting schedule might help with that, and I favor curation penalties as well so that regularly voting against strong stakeholder quality consensus has a cost.
Whether people mainly vote for quality or just to reward themselves will determine whether Steem devolves into a Ponzi scheme or not, and I see that as the largest risk for the network.
Once too much stake is held by abusive voters, the only way to recover will be forking them out. The sooner we can stop abuse from being profitable the less likely that is to be necessary.