In keeping with what I said in my earlier post, I feel I owe @steembasicincome a more in depth apology for previous remarks by myself regarding the natural limitations of such a system. One should not expect to receive maximal upvotes when their units are extremely numerous compared to others. It would be incorrect if such a claim were made, and no such claim was ever made by @steembasicincome or their team members. I erroneously stated that limitations were a product of dishonest policy, these claims were unfounded and not based on good evidence. In looking at the big picture, such a limitation is actually good for the Steem economy because it prevents plutocrats from dominating the system, which could threaten Steem price stability because of the possibility of a massive sell of Steem which could drastically drop the price of Steem. Whether this would be short term or long term, I do not know, but I am working on the assumption of long term damage for now.
@steembasicincome is a great project which not only helps Steemians by upvoting their posts, but also invigorates the economy.
Disclosure:
As implied by this post, I hold a great many sbi units. Thusly, the potential for bias is high. However, I stand strongly by what I am saying, and I do my very best to be honest and estrange myself from the influence of bias.
Thanks for the apology. We did built some inherent size limitations into our system. You were right in your initial comments that we were not doing enough to publicize those limitations, and we have been working to make sure that the limitations get more attention.
(We actually had somebody come to us about six months ago and ask if our system could handle $100k or if we would build a white label version just for them if it couldn't and we said no. In the long run that will be insignificant, but right now it would be way too much for us to handle. )