You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Can Steemit really work longterm? Each Steemit post is determined by just around 20 whales / people
I do not understand the logic of evaluating the quality of content. it directly correlates with SP balance in the voting. we build a system of social inequality. The world of the rich. I think that the value of the content should be determined by the sum of all votes equally. and the distribution of remuneration should take place on the SP voting. or I'm wrong?
I do agree with you to some degree. If I take reddit as the example, where each vote counts equally, the over curation system seems to work really well with great content on the front page.
Of course, playing devils advocate, The people that consistently curate great content should get a further incentive to do so. So that the content that gets to the top is the best content.
Basically, the current system is a good system in theory, but the current implementation seems to lead to a 'rich mans world'. Maybe a solution should be that a portion of the payout should be given equally to all voters and a portion given out dependent on the Steem Power the voters have.