To think, for example freedom or fyrst will turn into curators because you raised the curation is actually the shortsighted view.
Nobody thinks that AFAIK. The realistic goal and more likely outcome is that they delegate to someone or some type of service which takes curation more into account (and that if they don't they will be penalized with lower rewards and less ability to milk the reward pool).
Do you think people will downvote more?
Yes I do, but how much is a question.
No they wont. Fear of retaliation will still be there.
Right now there is fear of retaliation, and in addition a system which makes the downvote cost about as much to the downvoter as it takes away from the upvoter. This is goofy, insane, and it should be no great mystery why there are almost NO downvotes (supposedly something like 0.01% to 0.1%), even by stakeholders who don't post and don't care about retaliation.
When the cost of downvotes is reduced, there will still be the fear of retaliation, but not the enormous cost, so there will be some increase in downvotes. We'll have to see whether it is enough to do the job.
GINA is busted, almost missed this.
Well, they do think it unfortunately. I gave them two as an example of those maximizing personal gain but the point was that those that want to max will always go maxing if the opportunity is there.
Why would delegating to a curation service be something they would do?
Selling votes would still be the best option for them. The loss in liquid payments replaced with increase in curation.
A curation service, imo will never be able to match a vote selling service in ROI consistently.
Sure, the gap between what curators earn and bot delegators will reduce (Which i think is the main goal of this proposal.I find curator jealousy to be the actual motivator behind this proposal, but thats just my opinion)
but that doesnt really change the fact that selling votes isnt going away.
Curators can right now earn quite a bit more then bot delegators and that doesnt really mean anything. i wonder what kind of ROI the cheneats script is getting nowadays.
There are downvotes. Say something that a whale doesnt like, get into an argument and youll see a downvote flying towards you.. That ofc is rare, but with this you give psychos free ammunition and you let them loose on a creator base that had 25% stripped from their payouts, their growth slowed down and their motivation reduced.
But still, fear of retaliation is why you arent seeing much towards the community downvoting, or witnesses or large account creators.
Guys like Bernie will have a field day. Free downvotes, increased payouts once consolidates all his SP in one account and faster growth in comparison to now.
Will this stop that?
What about the circle jerk daily photography orcas? Will that stop?
Why would it stop? Will you downvote them? Are you against photography? Do you hate art?
No matter the change those that arent interested in curation will not be interested in curation and those that want to circle jerk will always circle jerk (Theres something called: Putting in minimal effort required to eliminate the chance of a flag)
People will continue acting the way they act right now and i think that indeed, creators will leave STEEM. Especially good ones. No behaviors will change and all that happens is that you took from creators and gave more to big SP holders.
Which could turn out positive for some shitty ones because they can now get more attention with the quality bar lowered..