You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Open Letter to Ned and Dan: You Badly Need a Communications/Community/Content Expert and I Hereby Nominate @stellabelle or @donkeypong For That Job
How it makes the site worse when it gives more power to the users? I haven't seen any other kind of proposals to decrease the voting power of bots.
I really don't like to pimp my posts in other peoples threads, but I think this is an important topic. The new target definitely takes away power from the most active curators... you can read some analysis by me here:
https://steemit.com/steem-help/@sigmajin/the-tale-of-the-5-brothers-a-voting-power-parable
Yes, it does hurt bots, but it also hurts all very active curators, human and bot alike.
You really should pimp your posts when they are relevant. How else people could find them?
Here is my take: https://steemit.com/steem/@samupaha/humans-are-better-than-bots-at-valueing-posts
yeah, but who wants to be "that guy".. anyway read and commented on yr post
I don't see any problem if the post will bring value to the discussion. Of course all irrelevant links should be discouraged.
Thanks for the link.
Earlier you stated that my comment was absolutely false. Careful reading will reveal that I basically said the same thing you did, but without the math (because, as I noted, I wasn't positive).
No, you did not. You said precisely the opposite of what I did. You claimed that the 5 vote target will not change curators overall voting power. My post shows how it will.
I can't really explain any better than I did in that post. If you read that post and thought i was saying the same thing as you did above, I can only conculde that youre being intentionally obtuse.
like i said in the other post, i have no idea how any rational person could read the post i linked and think i was supporting this statement:
There is literally a chart that shows precisely how much users daily power will change, with a before, after and % change column. I really don't see how that is ambiguous at all.
Even if you don't agree with the analysis, thats fine, but there's no way to interpret what i said as anything but a repudiation of the above. I really don't know how to explain to you otherwise if thats what you toook from reading that post.
I encourage everyone reading this to take a look.
Be nice. I'm neither being "obtuse" nor am I an idiot.
If I miscommunicated, that's another matter. Even after reading yours, plus the comments, and then looking back at my comment, I can't see your point at all. It's entirely possible that you've misread my comment.