Where we seem to get stuck in a loop is that you seem to think that if we switch to n^2 or some other form of super linear curve, the problem of “non-proof-of-brain” rewards is just automatically fixed. You seem to be characterizing it in a way that the stakeholders with tons of stake will not act selfishly and they will actually vote in ways that benefit the platform.
I keep going back to the same two things:
- Even if we go back to having the large stakeholders be the ones who decide the rewards again, they are not going to just start rewarding proof-of-brain activity. They are going to continue doing what they were doing prior to HF 16, which was essentially rewarding the majority of the stake to the same “in” authors, regardless of the quality of their content.
- Even if we ignore #1, and pretend that the whales would not do what they were doing before, and giving them the power would magically reward proof of brain activity - 99% of the users on the platform would go back to having practically no influence over rewards. We have learned in the past that if users don’t even feel that they can buy or earn their way in, that they don’t see a point in investing, which kills most organic demand for SP.