This is because - say what you want about him as a person - @dan understood economics. And he did so on a level most people aren't able to grasp. I wholeheartedly agree that the original model should never have been tampered with in the first place.
Stuff was never really given a whole lot of opportunities to work itself out there at the start. A hardfork was made, there was no moon. And another hardfork was made, still no moon. And then another one, and so on.
Until things stagnated to what we have now.
All these calls for discounted downvoting; we already had that. Under quadratic rewards you could halve a post's payout by downvoting with 1/4 of the vote weight.
People upvoted posts they thought would do well, instead of posts they wanted to do well.
We've gone from punters to jockeys.
Dan has publicly said he wants to make a new steem like blockchain ran on EOS echo system so honestly I don’t understand why people aren’t concerned.
Why would that make me concerned?
Eh just the guy who’s holding more steem then anyone else and who had the love and respect of half this platform. Could do some damage don’t ya think?
If @dan creates a better Steemit, I'll just go there. What's the problem? Consumers go for the best product.
It won’t be using steem tokens
He’s made that clear. So steem tokens would crash
That’s gonna leave a bad taste in a lot of people’s head.
Anyone with thousands of more invested in steem power won’t he happy when it’s penny a token. That’s all I’m saying