There is another way forward, which is for minnows and dolphins to vote.
If there were 3800 accounts active in the last 24 hours and about 500 articles and most of them only got about 6 or 7 votes, then it's because most of those accounts didn't bother to vote.
People need to vote. Go to the new section and vote for at least twenty articles a day. The problem is that most arn't voting and those who afre are voting for just a few authors. Spread the love people!
Most people don't vote - you are right. I think they see very little reward for their work. This would help with that.
https://steemit.com/@cygnus/curation-rewards
https://steem.li/curators
There's tons of rewards to be had curating the top curator has like 300sp and is making over 69% returns. He's human too not a bot (as far as I have heard and can tell personally). Like I said, there are tons of rewards to be had curating people just need to get off their fat asses and expecting a free hand out.
The problems on steemit are nothing different from anywhere else, people are fucking lazy, that's it. I think this proposal is completely unneeded personally. What happened when we dumped more rewards on the scene in July, when people were making 1000's for their posts? Why they just went and dumped it on the markets and helped aid in the tanking of the price, real team players they were helping to build the system.
The people who need to be rewarded are the people who are HOLDING AND PRODUCING QUALITY. Not one of the other, at least right now, and when I say rewarded I mean with the big payouts like 100's to 1000's.
So yeah I think the concept is good, and in the future yes this could be implemented, but right now steemit's success depends on who they upvote, not how they upvote.
All my opinion of course.
I read that too. What isn't clear is 69% of what? I also think the statement that there are a ton of rewards is BS when you consider that that user made 5.3 SP this week. That is not in my definition or the definition of anyone I know a tonne of rewards.
It seems your perception is in direct contrast to most other people I've spoken to, including myself.
its 69 % of the total steem power he has... over the year... that wasnt clear, or am I wrong there? 69% returns are phenomenal, just because the user has a small amout of steem doesnt change the perspective. I also realize my opinion is the unpopular one, I 100% agree with you there, and I'm not saying the community has to go with it, I'm merely stating it, and as someone who has invested a few grand I think that should be alright?
I feel this way because I'm making 16% returns very easily, I dont watch, I dont open steemit every five minutes, I just use it, read what I like and upvote the authors I enjoy as I see them. I'm putting in zero effort when it comes to curating other then just using steemit and i'm getting that, so to me, I see curation as fine and dandy.
I've actually written a post on how I beleive curation should be reallocated from anyone with over 15,000 SP in their curation rewards to the people under 10 or 5,000SP. It was merely a rough idea but I said I'd be willing to give up 20% of my rewards to help distribution, again because I'm finding it that easy. I kept thinking maybe rewards were skewed in the favour of the whales (and dolphins), but with their overall sp slowing dropping (even though they are selling) I figured it was slowing redistributing downward. Then I saw the post about @cygnus and thought holy shit, it is possible.
EDIT I need to revoke my previous opinion on this idea, I agree with it, I completely forgot steem is handed out daily regardless this will merely spread out the people who can give it out. So thumbs up to the post idea, however I'm still of the same position that curation rewards are actually paying decently, if not exceptionally, and if anything a little redistribution would be alright in the beginning to help steemit diverse.
Great response! I agree that's why if we got delegated voting it would solve a lot of these problems.