You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Ned Scott and @theoretical of Steemit Explore Oracles on Steem
Imagine a SMT with 1P1V only emits 0.5% emissions per year and that’s enough to create a highly effective autonomous content curation system. What’s the problem with that? “Ayn Rand says this” is nice argumentative rhetoric but it does not capture nor disprove the collective benefits these distros can provide.
People are not equally competent. Some are better than others and for that reason deserves more influence. The "problem" you are trying to solve will in most, if not all systems be a net negative. You are wasting a lot of time with this flawed ideal.
People are not equally competent is a premise of the system. Those who are more competent earn more.
Earning more for competence is good but just one side of the coin. Also having influence follow competence is an ideal.
I wouldn't say that experimenting is a waste of time. AFAIK, both Oracles and SMT won't affect the consensus token (STEEM) distribution directly, thus there is nothing to be worried about, and we will be able to determine which reward distributing system works the best.
I am simply trying to dispel the notion that "one body one vote" is a good idea. It's not.
Yeah, maybe, but it's gonna be up to the SMT creator to choose a reward distribution system. One may decide to not use Oracles and 'one person one vote' at all.
Under Quadratic Influence, it’s not simply 1P1V. I think we need to acknowledge that’s the actual basis for bringing up 1P1V. The combination incentivizes quality, influential authors and intelligent curation.
best option imo would be if sp had diminishing returns. I don't think ppl hate stake weighting entirely its just kind of offsetting when people realize that theres only a small portion of the reward pool is even for for grabs to anyone who hasnt been here for over a year
However, when the lever —machine(SP)_ is made very large, the contribution ratio of the individual —driver(Steemian)_ is very small. At that time, capital or PoB were at work.
权利需要放在笼子里。
Rights need to be placed in cages.