Would be better if there was not a bunch of collusion that downvotes perfectly good content to ensure the reward pool doesn't payout to much and sucks all the profits back to them. After a while ppl stop posting and realize that its not worth it unless you can plow a bunch of money in and sneak in set up a operation to be superior to the current alliance that is extracting all the money and suppressing others votes otherwise you prob wont be getting much to be worth your time unless your in a country where the lower money goes further but at this point we need to reset HIVE and fork it and remove or significantly reduce like was done to the steemit ppl stakes of the ppl abusing the system which are all the large whales just audit all the actions and i believe its been done and then based on the level and length of the offences just re allocate that money in a fork to all the other users who would get the power leaving the current powerful accounts powerless and if it took off and maybe get backing from a capital raise and if you could raise enough then maybe could incentivize splinterlands to move over by giving a grant to move as well as funding a endowment fund via stable coins that earn a 10-15% apr outside of the platform that back the returns paid out which would be a savings rate that's reasonable and the rest could be used to allocate to projects based on voting power of the stakeholders with say a structure to return some portion of the money back to the endowment fund and then part of it would also go to just reinvesting into other assets to grow it. Other ways it would make money would be the new DHF would get all advertising revenue and sign up revenue as well as other sources of revenue and have a deposit and withdrawal fee as well as some additional fees to have other revenue streams which would be necessary until the money is paid back plus a return to the investors who dont control anything from the interest designated for grants but control all the other sources until they make a pre set return and get principal back then they are bought out and the funds are handed over to the stakeholders plus a small portion is converted to stakes for investors so they then get a decent stake but not one that could over power anything so they still can profit with everyone. There would be a down vote appeals group that would penalize retaliatory downvotes or frivolous downvotes and there would be no arbitrary rules and x% of the community would need to vote any guideline in and it would be a high %. This would reset the entire system put a sustainable funding mechanism in place and have a dao as well that would be run similarly to the sps dao and be managed transparently so ppl actually know what's going on and we dont end up wasting money on cars and stupid things that benefit certain ppl only with rigged approval. If it could work and a group could be found then i bet most would leave if they got funding from the new fund to come over and the old platform would lose all its liquidity which are the small users leaving the whales holding there bags that they then would have to trade to others and have a rule that one must burn there hive or send it to a null account if they want to receive the fork which would have real value backing it not just a algorithmic stable coin which is much less stable than real dollar backed and other crypto backed revenue.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I hear the frustration... especially around downvotes, cliques, and the feeling that some good content gets suppressed. That experience does push people away.
Where I slightly differ is the “reset + fork + confiscation” approach. I think that kind of scorched-earth move would create even more division and trust issues, and it would be hard to rally everyone behind it long-term.
But your core point is valid: if the average creator feels like they have no fair chance, growth stalls.
What I’d rather see (and what I think is more achievable) is:
stronger social norms around downvotes (clear reasons, avoid retaliation, use muting/ignoring more often),
more visible, transparent curation trails that support outside-the-circle creators,
and more onboarding + consumption incentives, because without readers, even the best writers feel like they’re posting into a void.
If we fix those, whales won’t feel like “gatekeepers”... they’ll feel like “gardeners.”
I see your point with the removing of assets maybe a board that is independent and does a complete audit and makes sure every transaction is transparent and in the best interest of hive stake holders with them having a blocking authority over DHF funds for a certain period of time to allow for the blocking or challenge of items by having accounts that are small sign up for a proxy vote contract that would auto delegate all hive owned to the board account on demand and be able to wield all the power of the small accounts at once to vote to block certain things or be able to ensure compliance with rules that are consistent for all members. Maybe instead of taking assets if the ownership could not be over come then voting shares are limited in certain situations where actions of the larger players collusion is in question and how that collusion negatively impacts HIVE and if found that the actions are not consistent with a fiduciary relationship then they would also in this case as part of the them holding on to leadership positions need to put up significant collateral that can be slashed and any account that is known to be associated with the account under investigation would not be allowed to vote on the slashing penalty. Losing money if they act in a way that would not be necessarily in the interest of all members should not be tolerated and if they can lose money a good chunk then they wont do it likely.
That idea is more practical... strong transparency + independent oversight could build trust without nuking the chain. The key is making it credible and truly community-aligned.