The front end does play a role, for example in discouraging downvoting (yes, I'm aware that the front end is not the only discouragement, but it does play a role).
And who are most of those frontends self -obsessed whales.
One example I have seen is of grumpy cat,I don't know if he wants to flag someone or correct someone why their he needs a self upvote there,that seems like misuse of ultra power they have.
Can't the "community" only do so much considering witnesses determine what fork or patch to run and their rankings are completely determined by which whales vote for them, so clearly the witnesses would never have an incentive to run any patch that doesn't have at least a few ways for the whales to continue to direct the reward pool towards themselves in an efficient manner? And it's not like the witnesses would want to run any version of the blockchain that would scare away large investors in the first place even without that being true, so until whales stop wanting their cake in the immediate we will never see an end to any of this.
That's good news, but sadly I think anyone with a killer winning formula is going to go with their own coin/chain as far as anything with a sensible economic model goes. Steemit is a great case study on how not to make the economy of the future though, so there's that. Target inflation of 0.5% might as well be deflationary, and authorship/curation having different payout mechanisms needs to be addressed. Has anyone proposed a fork where they both give the same payout options?
The front end does play a role, for example in discouraging downvoting (yes, I'm aware that the front end is not the only discouragement, but it does play a role).
And who are most of those frontends self -obsessed whales.
One example I have seen is of grumpy cat,I don't know if he wants to flag someone or correct someone why their he needs a self upvote there,that seems like misuse of ultra power they have.
Can't the "community" only do so much considering witnesses determine what fork or patch to run and their rankings are completely determined by which whales vote for them, so clearly the witnesses would never have an incentive to run any patch that doesn't have at least a few ways for the whales to continue to direct the reward pool towards themselves in an efficient manner? And it's not like the witnesses would want to run any version of the blockchain that would scare away large investors in the first place even without that being true, so until whales stop wanting their cake in the immediate we will never see an end to any of this.
As a witness your assumptions don't fit my opinion. I'd gladly run a fork that had sensible changes that had been researched and outlined
That's good news, but sadly I think anyone with a killer winning formula is going to go with their own coin/chain as far as anything with a sensible economic model goes. Steemit is a great case study on how not to make the economy of the future though, so there's that. Target inflation of 0.5% might as well be deflationary, and authorship/curation having different payout mechanisms needs to be addressed. Has anyone proposed a fork where they both give the same payout options?