RE: Why Inequality on Steemit is a Good Thing!
I am not that sure that inequality is a good thing. Because the whales are paying out in a way that doesn't make sense. I will make an article tomorrow why this inequality isn't good. I am not advocating the whales to change this. They do what they want. I just try to make them aware of things. What they do with my view is up to them.
I understand they invested more so they need to get extra advantages. I can understand why they get more free Steem Power every day than the rest of us. I can understand that they get more money when they get upvoted than we do. But the fact that they have so much power when they upvote, is not good. It is completely against the free market. And the free market will decide whether Steemit is a worthy product or not. If the free market decides the content that is valued here, is not what they want, then the market will dump Steemit and the whales will be left with a crashed project.
What does "completely against the free market" mean? In the real world, if we have a free market, having more money gives you power over other people. I don't think I understand why you'd use the free market to argue this point.
=======
If you like my writing and ideas, check out my series on the game theory of steem!
Maybe I didn't chose my wording correctly. What I wanted to say is that the whales are only a very small group here. Their preference of topics is not going to determine the success of Steemit. It's the preference of the subscribers that is of importance. If 20 whales would only like to see introduction posts and therefore only introduction posts are rewarded, but 2 million of people would like to see other topics, than whales will kill this project. Because the project will only become a success if Steemit provides topics that satisfy the desire of the 2 million subscribers.
I gave an extreme example here, but just to illustrate why I think whales upvoting power is way too big compared to the rest. The rest has hardly any influence on the topics that are rewarded. You could compare this with a company forcing 2 million people to buy their product without caring whether these 2 million people like the product or not.
Ok, I understand we are still in an initial phase and they want to attract people. But I think at this point attracting people shouldn't be the number 1 focus. What is more important now is to make sure that the value is here to attract people automatically. I am working on a post about this topic that I will publish here tomorrow to make my point clear.
Thanks for the link. I will read it. I am curious about your game theoretic explanation.