I try not to underestimate the intelligence of my audience. If the fact that the path upwards becomes exponentially steep the higher they go is important, I let them know. Shifting from displaying values linearly to logarithmically was a pretty revelatory move when I was doing an analysis and breakdown of the curve of diminishing SP at the top of the ownership lists on the blockchain.
It's one thing to see that there is a self similar curve. It's quite another to see that, aside from a few bumps in the road, that curve remains linear when viewed logarithmically all the way down. At that point, it makes it much easier to see the aberrations – and the aberrations are where the interest are.
However, I would be keen on a Vested Steem Power analysis of voting - does money vote for money?
I've obviously given up all concerned about naming names and drawing attention, mainly because I figure there is nothing that would be more supportive of my analysis than some big names getting bent out of shape enough to start voting me down in earnest.
I like the income, but I can't be saying anything to particularly radical because neither Bernie nor Haejin have decided that I'm worth putting the boots to. That's probably the right analysis on their part, given that I'm just pointing out abstruse corners of things going on in the blockchain and their game is in an entirely different space.
But that's how I roll.
"Does money vote for money?" That should be a fairly easy analysis to put together, and one that I find myself being vaguely curious about as well.
I'll just add that to my "potential future stories" pile.