@aggroed Holy shit the elite screwed with you badly man, sorry to hear that. Anyway that's a whole other big topic, so let's focus on SteemIt which is a project that could truly get us in the right direction. We both seem to be equally passionate about the potential of SteemIt and angry about the implementation of the algorithms.
I totally agree that the biggest problem is curation. I've written many articles about it (for example this recent one). The other big problem i agree with is that about 90% of the rewards go to the top 8%. This is in my opinion the result of the bad curation algorithms and therefore incentive. These are the 2 best solutions I've come up with so far are:
- Don't allow curation directly after publications for a period of time based on the size of the content (so people have the time to read it first)
- Reduced rewards when voting for the same user time after time
What do you think about my solutions and what other ideas do you have?
1st one only delays the onset of the same problems. The second one maybe... I put 6-7 ideas at the bottom. I don't have a hidden trove beyond those yet :)
I just replied somewhere with my preferable reward distribution:
Would you like a distribution close to this one? And what can be done to achieve this you think? (One thing that is important is to design it into the protocol, we can't rely on people, people are corrupt as hell haha).
Well, I actually like the distribution we have now. I want the whales incentivized to curate. I see a bunch of them doing it well. So, I think the incentive is there. What's bad is the incentive to curate anything likely to trend.
I like that authors get 72%. That seems about right.
It's a shame that commentors get little, but I think that's cultural and a little on the programming side. hard enough to get people to upvote 40 posts. Now you want them to curate all the comments too? I think that's going to meet resistance.
The one I'd change is interest. Witnesses set that unless I'm missing a piece. Just set it to 0 and we have 7% of $50M a year to dole out to non-rich people.
So, I like our current distribution scheme from a overall percentage end. I think we just need to broaden who it goes to.
I dream about a world where talking about whales is irrelevant. The system should just recognize how well a person curates. I have nothing against whales earning more absolute profits than us, as long as we all are treated equally when it comes to our curation skill. Currently there is no variable that keeps track of curation quality, only the shitty reputation variable that is nothing more than a World of Warcraft level AKA quantity (it should be called popularity, not reputation!).
Since SteemIt is still in beta, everything is subject to change. So if author rewards suddenly drop by 50% users will have to get used to it.
Weirdly enough with currently only 2% going to comments i feel i get rewarded appropriately (at least from my experience).
Interest is actually one of the most important ones. If people can only get interest by buying STEEM (POWER), then you have the incentive for investors and the value of STEEM will grow immensly until it's stable (10-20 years into the future probably). But of course this is one more implementation that is currently not optimal. Can we even call it interest BTW? Isn't it just inflation (immunity/compensation)?
How about not playing games with rewards at all? How about basing the curation reward, and the author reward, on the quality of the curators reputations, and number of curators?
These kinds of games only decrease the rewards potential to authors.
Steemit can become an awesome means for people to create a new paradigm in how to base an economy, and since automation is going to take all our jobs, we need a new paradigm.
Instead of playing the same kinds of games banksters do, let's really live up to the rhetoric and reward the authors, commenters, and curators for their actual creation of the value of the platform.
Make it simple, and fair, and people will stay. Don't and they won't. It really is as simple as that.