@barrycooper, I am excited to see this substantive discussion being lead by you on Steemit. Over the last 10-15 years, I remember seeing and hearing good things about you. Thank you for staying vocal fighting for the little guy.

Regarding your use of the term "unfair"

Steem’s unfair defect should raise the eyebrows of thousands of activists.

I noticed the unfair glitch in Steem from the beginning.

This unfair use of force recently happened to Dollar Vigilante’s Jeff Berwick

The criticism of fairness is invalid because the platform was not designed to optimize fairness. Steemit.com has only ONE purpose and that is to increase the value of $STEEM.

Regarding the concentration of voting power in a few number of accounts "whales",

If you really want to do well on Steem, you must please its board of directors, known as “Steem Whales.”

This is exactly the opposite of what whales want. Currently, as the people with the most skin in the game, they want to maximize the value of the platform. If you look at Steemwhales.com the top 10 acounts are EACH down several hundred thousand dollars in the last week. They are motivated to change. They can only do this by increasing the number of posts that become popular. They are aware that the concentration of vests hurts them and things are being done to fix it. The "people rank" system that @dantheman has introduced is the first serious attempt to spread out the voting power. They are doing this precisely because they do not want 20 people to be the only ones who can make something trend. So while it may seem unfair I can assure you it is equitable for the $STEEM holders. There are financial interests that are motivating people with disproportionate voting power to spread it out. @smooth has been hiring curators to help him find more quality content. With the new WOT system, I expect to see rewards normalize over a few weeks to a larger base of posts.