I was gonna say, plenty have tried this over the last 7 years, few have succeeded.
Many were intentionally run off the platform, for a variety of reasons.
The hierarchy has not changed much.
That a hierarchy exists at all is an issue on a 'decentralized' platform, imo.
Maybe when the top 100 accounts stop taking 'all they can', we will see change at the bottom line.
Maybe not.
The taking was initially under the guise of 'protecting their stake', then became 'protecting the price of Hive' (presumably because that's easier to defend). In a way it's a shift from capitalism to 'socialist excuses for capitalism'.
Thing is, this is all a reflection of what transpires in the wider world. It's easy to point the finger at the bigger accounts - but the problems tend to balance out when 'the masses' take action themselves.. That's always an option here. We need that action to be creative rather than destructive... That would be an important step into genuinely decentralised creative process/evolution
Yes, I have been encouraging powering up more hive to change the management in the hive.
It seems to be working.
We escape this top down management scheme when we have enough stake to make those folks' time better spent elsewhere.
It's not easy to get folks to give up power once they have had a taste of it.
But, the way to mass adoption is in coin distribution, not hoarding it by those that already have too much.
Decentralisation requires actual decentralisation in order to be effective, yes.
So.. we market! :)