You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Reduced Author Rewards of The Economic Improvement Proposal is Moronic and Unfair
Not every curator can make more money than a self vote. Even in a system with 50/50, the people who vote in the end WILL get less steem than those who vote at the beginning. 50/50 will not make more people want to vote on others, since they still have a chance of getting nothing.
Instead, more people need to think of voting as donating, you need to be okay with losing the possible curation rewards you could have gotten to donate to the author. Some people can be curators and just browse NEW and curate, but everyone else should see their votes as donations, because that's what they end up as anyway.
Yes
True but not so relevant. Under a 50/50 system the average curator makes half as a much as self voting.
This is why downvotes are needed to help close the gap further. If you self-vote in an abusive manner, yes you may get 2x compared to curating, but you may also get downvoted and earn nothing. The added risk means you may be better of curating.
That plus perhaps at least some people would rather do the right thing. Maybe they aren't willing to give up a huge profit when the difference between self-voting and curating is 4x and there is almost now downvoting (as is the case today), but perhaps they would be willing to do the right thing if the difference is only 2x and from there downvoting is a real risk. Ultimately we'll see.
Unlikely to happen, if it was going to happen it would have by now and we wouldn't be having this discussion.