We as community will decide nothing. Zero. A couple of big accounts will lead the game. Like now with witnesses and HFs.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
We as community will decide nothing. Zero. A couple of big accounts will lead the game. Like now with witnesses and HFs.
wanted to vote on the pool but than decided it will be a waste of my 100% upvote, will rather spread it through community
Why so pessimistic?
Here is a chance to do it another way :)
Posted using Partiko Android
On contrary. I'm very optimistic and I know that these big accounts will take care of this. If they don't the steem will die.
Keep in mind, that those big accounts you're talking about are having a huge incentive to achieve a high STEEM price and to keep Steem healthy. The more you have, the more you have to lose. Same applies on Steem.
I believe the community has a huge impact - I wrote this post because of this reason; to get the community involved.
That incentive is proportionally reduced by the rent they can extract for their stake. You know that. It's what you do. That's what bidbots are: mechanisms to produce rentier income. They're not effecting curation based on content quality. No one buys your vote for that. You collect rent on your stake so they can get fat rewards, and for no other reason. Curation that is content agnostic isn't curation at all. It's a huge part of the dismal retention rate and almost entirely responsible for the condition of trending.
Please don't gloss over basic investment principles in order to steer the narrative away from your business model just because it reflects poorly on you. Step up and own it. It's your legacy.
I understand and fully agree what you say but comparing the SP of community and SP of these guys, one can easily see who will decide where the money will flow.
And please don't get me wrong . I'm just trying to be realistic and have a full trust in these big guys.
But if they screw up so called community will just run to find another teat to suck from.
That's how life works my friend. No science here.
Perhaps what is required is a voting mechanism weighted on stake as well as popular vote.
HF acceptance would still be a stake issue; however to go against the popular will may have a cost to witness' position going forward. Even STINC's stake is said to have dropped from an overall 80% down to the 20's now.
I just can't wrap my mind over the things you are saying. They are completely contradictory to what you are trying to say. Intentionally or not, I can't figure that out either.
Point being: how can taking 20% from 99% of Steem's user base by any means be considered healthy?