I read a lot about the past of Hive. Getting rid of the pre-mined stake from a centralized entity was a good move, but distributing the inflation correctly is as important. You don't want your inflation to end up in the market after 7 days.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
You actually want to distribute this inflation to users who are in here for the long run, who believe holding $hive and $leo is better.
What good is to stack tokens via voting circles if only you & your friends hold said token long term.
An ecosystem as complicated as Hive/Leo needs to have users who are here for the long run, & reward their posts instead of posts form those who are here for the present rewards, who sell your ecosystem's inflation at the 1st chance they get
Downvotes are good, I'd never get rid of them. They allow the community to decide where token allocation goes. Having downvotes is a way to protect your ecosystem's inflation and try to decide in a decentralized way where it should go.
Curation projects are good as long as there is not a monopoly, which apparently is what happens on Hive. I don't see that happening in Leo Finance. From what I've seen, Hive users are lazy & prefer to delegate their voting allocation cont
instead of actively distributing their share of inflation the way they want to. On the other hand, I noticed that most if not all of the Leo holders prefer to do their voting themselves. This is a better behavior if you want healthy growth.
Curation groups are good when you want to incentivize new users and keep your community encouraged and grow, but having a handful of groups controlling half the active Hive Power is not a healthy distribution, even if it's just delegated.
When it comes to Leo Finance, I also have to mention that having the oracle accounts actively voting is not healthy for the reward distribution, because as far as I know the votes are controlled by the team. But the pros trump the cons...