and now that these changes will decrease the economic value for most small-medium sized accounts.... lol
it really doesn't make sense.
If steem needed money to keep running and had to take a little from everyone in proportion to their size... go for it
but the money that is being taken from authors is not going back into the pool evenly distributed.
curation rewards are stake based.
for the large account that gives a huge upvote - and then gets curation back? they're getting back double.
for the small account that gives their "huge" upvote - (100% for them, but still only .01) their curation rewards are being doubled... from what? 0.001 to 0.002?
but the huge accounts - THEIR curation rewards are being doubled too. from $2.00 to $4.00??? or much more???
it doesn't seem very fair to me.
Yes, definitely in the short term the effect is to decrease the non-big accounts get. However, it does give some reason (albeit small at the moment) to use the author earnings to power up rather than to sell.
Anyway, I only know that economies are much more complex and non-linear systems than what many expect. I only know that there will be unexpected results, quite probably not the ones we expect... And that I just have no idea!
... Which does lead me to wonder why an economist or two isn't consulted about these economic changes? It appears that in the crypto space (not just Steem) we fall into the trap that there are easy and simplistic cause and effect...but that is off topic, just interesting (and not a comment on you, just digressing...).
take a look at the new post... im about to tag you in it.
;)