You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Inflation as a Platform Cost. Another Look at Stake

in #steem6 years ago

I'm still against vote selling. I just didn't explicitly say it in this post. Where do you have the impression I gave them a call out though? Oh. My one mention. But that isn't a support of the vote selling service.

I think I am missing something in regards to full n^2. You are saying the whales were keeping each other in check effectively so the abuse wasn't so rampant? I'm under the impression that it wouldn't work out if the stake of the bad actor is much too large. Do you have any good references for this?

Sort:  

With the whale experiment, all votes of more than 800mv were negated by the responsible whales.

The greedy whales, who are well known by name, were using their advantage in the math to crush everybody but themselves and their sycophants.
The golden boys, and girls, that toed their corporate speak guidelines are dolphins and orcas now.
Those of us less inclined to kiss ass/sellout struggled to get any rewards at all.

During this experiment my vote went from zero to .06.
Needless to say there were some happy steemizens.

I didnt intend to imply any vote selling support on your part only to mention that the authorities you cited benefit from the current set up and werent here to know the difference.
Their confirmation bias is tuned to the status quo.

I was here, and have been vocal all along, bring back the n2 with the 800mv voting cap and lets see if making steem attractive to everybody works better than making it attractive to the select few.