I think the curve does need to go. It has led to vote slum lords pretty much, where the large accounts can vote on crap and have a lot of follow on votes. The not voting on post just because they have a lot of votes, and a lot of rewards from a social perspective is kind of bull. If a person likes something then vote give it a reward. not every book is a best seller, not every best seller is a good book. If you like the post reward it if you read it.
The self vote needs to be dumped. It serves no purpose at all other than to give a person a self reward. Investors are not really making a lot of post to self vote, so the claim of return on investment is pretty much a garbage claim. The self vote also has a very adverse effect for new users, a user with out the ability to give a vote above the dust level is losing out on the ability to grow their account. They need to vote on content that already has a payout.
Time of voting on content I agree 100% with you, I also vote on a post when I see it, does not matter if it is 5 or 6 days old or not, and the reward amount has very little bearing on whether I vote or not. The deciding factor is did I like the post.
The nice thing about Hive right now is there is room for all types of content, and all types of usage. There is room for the curator, the investor, the developer, and the I just want to look at things and read things people and sometimes share a little something. That is the real beauty of Hive, room for everyone right now, so changes to eliminate one group or another will have a very large effect on Hive Block Chain.
Yup..^this^.
The 'voting cliques' are biiiig negative (for the growth of hive).
How do you realistically get rid of the self vote when people can just have 2nd accounts holding the HP and upvote their other accounts.
You can't, any more than you can stop spam or plagiarism. You can make it more difficult however. I am sure there are a lot of second and third and forth accounts doing just that. Just as there are multiple accounts supporting their other accounts that support their plagiarism and spam accounts.
All we can do is make it more difficult. When it comes to GREED there is no control methods that are 100%. We can throw up our hands and ignore it or try to decrease it by making it more difficult.
Yes I know it could all be automated, but people do lose keys all the time, people do get hacked on a regular basis, if Governments around the world can not stop hackers to think that an individual is safe from them is foolhardy. To pretend that the keys to an account are safe is also just as fool hardy unless they are written down on paper and stored in a bomb and fire proof safe. Even then they are not safe if you lose the key or the combination to the safe.
I agree with self up vote, it's a deterrent to growing the platform. Why bother up voting others when you can just up vote yourself. Getting rid of the reward pool though won't encourage or onboard new users, whoever thought of that one really needs to reflect upon the consequences.
It seems some will not be happy until we are a merger of facebook, twitter, reddit, and youtube. people come to steem and hive style block chain places to get away from those and the trolls. We are almost a merger of the four, and it is the reward pools that make us stand out, They understand this that is why they all are talking about monetizing their system to one similar to Hive and Steem.
Exactly.