I think you guys should make a rule that you can only vote on the same authors a maximum of 4-5 times per week I am a little tired of seeing the same authors make all the money every day. And you could penalize people on their curation rewards if they are abusing the voting system.
That is a really brilliant idea. It may also create an incentive for people to slow down on posting as it is fast becoming hard to keep up with posts. I suspect the post limit may need to be reduced down to 2 or maybe even 1 (from the current 4) in order to make things more manageable. It would certainly help to get a spotlight on greater range of posters.
The post limit sucks. It's a limitation on freedom of expression. Censorship. Why be punished if you want to write a lot of short messages? Who said that the steem blockchain shouldn't be used to post tweet sized messages? What if another application comes along to replace twitter and use steem? Then the stupid post limitation will ruin it.
Were you around before they did that? We had people posting B.S. literally about every 5 minutes. It made it extremely difficult to curate.
I agree! How do the little guys ever catch up?
How would that be determined? (What's abusing the voting system?)
Voting more then 20 times a day or voting only on the same exact authors 4 times a day. Or only following whales and voting on their work only.
Right, but then bots will just limit their number of votes strictly to 20 votes. I mean it's pretty much like that right now, with decreasing voting power after each vote. What you're proposing, I assume, is just to lower the limit. That doesn't solve the problem though, it only raises the question: "What limit is enough to dissuade bots, but not regular users from using the system?"
And why in the world should anyone have to have a limit on who and how many times they can vote for someone? Or anything? It's one vote per post. You're just suggesting another form of censorship.
There is no limit. You can vote once per post/comment. There is a % that your vote is worth. Without it what is to stop you for up voting every single post and comment that comes through and gaming the curation system. It'd amount to zero curation and tons of crap posts. You could post a 1 line post and get an up vote from all the people. You can vote as many times as you want. The weight of your vote decreases to prevent this problem. It is realistic and is not the thing people are complaining about, except a few outliers like yourself. I haven't actually heard many people complain about the % thing once they understand why it is there. If you want to get rid of it then you'd need to propose a solution that can replace it that would prevent gaming the system. It won't be pulled no matter how you dislike it without some viable alternative being in place.
@acassity
This already does happen :
After 20 votes in a 24 hour period there's a steeply curved drop off of voting weight. If you want to see your current voting power just look yourself up on steemstats.com created by @jesta. It allows you to track any users voting weight and shows how many votes they've thrown out in a 24 hour period. I use it daily because it has all kinds of embedded tools that scrape the blockchain for all the info you could possibly need. I honestly use it more than the built in user dashboard because it has more functionality right now and a much better user interface.