You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Revisiting Curation Reward: Hot Coffee, Cold Coffee, and Lukewarm Coffee
Instead of flopping around stirring up tsunamis they could just refrain from voting and the disparity issue diminishes.
I still think raising the bottom without punishing the top is the way to make this more palatable, but I don't know if the math can do that.
It can't and one of sigmajin's previous posts gives numbers. The easy intuitive explanation is that one big downvote on a top-ranked post raises the rewards on hundreds of lower ranked posts (if the traffic on the site were larger it would be even more). It simply isn't possible or practical to vote on all those hundreds of posts instead, even if the effectiveness of the vote power were the same, which it isn't.
So, it's a new curve that curbs the top and raises the bottom?
The bottom definitely needs raised, unless folks like me can see a cup of coffee a week, they will never stick it out to get better known, and/or better at blogging.
Granted this issue has little impact on the eventual monetary aspects of steem.
I hope you vote against institutionalizing the guilds, it is not better to hide the influence being shared across a number of accounts, imo.
Better would be to stop being so heavy handed in the daily management of what the minnows are up to.
The community knows what it likes and doesn't need 'gems' picked out for it.
Picking winners and losers isn't helping the community find it's level, either.
Abuse is still a good reason to get a whale involved.
Thanks for all you do/have done for us,....