You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: If 1 trillion STEEM were simultaneously emptied onto the market, what would happen?
I think you guys are completely in agreement regarding what you mean by worth it.
I just wanna point out that maximizing financial return isn't the point of curation.
The point is supposed to be promoting content that you like, so that the creator is motivated to do more and better creation, and lotsa people get to see it.
Not being critical of you guys personally, honest. I just want to find a way to actually achieve that purpose of promoting content.
So, I ask, what changes in Steemit might return curation to it's original stated purpose, from the wealth creation strategy it seems to have become?
Curation has been crushed a little by HF-19 and the reward pool payment changes. Over the next few months were truly going to see how things have changed??
Yes, but..
I am not somehow intent on denigrating acquisition of wealth, but I do see Steemit as more than that, and see that focus on growing wealth seems to have been pitted against promoting content creation in Steemit's present formulation.
I am seeking ideas on how to eliminate that conflict. How to achieve the stated goal of Steemit to reward content creation and curation as a primary goal, rather than subsume that purpose to pursuit of financial reward, and wealth creation.
Any ideas?
Further weighted voting rights to minnows as per hard fork 19?
This is an incremental step in the right direction, I think.
What about simply not weighting votes according to wealth at all?
Right now its a linear voting model according to SP wealth ... before it was exponential! OUCH!!