Hi @teamsteem,
Thanks for responding. For the record, I did not put out the case that it should not be in proportion...but what proportion? That’s the 200 billion dollar question (aka Steem at $1000) that many of us are collectively trying to answer for the disproportionate benefit of all.
Apologies in advance: I'm going to do a mind spill...pls ignore my random dislexia and poor grammar, that has less todo with english being my 2rd language, but probably because I was dropped on the head as a child(probably for refusing to be quiet), so the lingual organization portion of my brian is now damaged and can't keep up with the vomit of my thoughts :)
 source pinterest
>Why is upvote, downvote, witness vote all dependent **'only'** on the amount of steem one owns?
:note the '**only**':
Do we want it to strictly assign 1:1 value to upvotes by steem ownership and hence discourages mass organic growth and mainstream adoption (as you can see from growing discontent and abandonment in the last few months alone)......or do we want Steemit to dynamically reflect other human resources that is require, like time and other factors necessarily to create, curate, and cultivate and value proof of brain?
Let’s look at some simple example of these other factors.
I think it’s obvious to many now that the Steem blockchain has not factor in time as an asset for proof of brain. To illustrate I have to generalize and be simplistic here:
For most new users, after a few weeks (or months) of steeming, realization hit that steemit is a time sucking blackhole with the appearance* of diminishing return, and worst they don’t even feel a connection like they were design todo when interacting with other humands due to thousand of years of survival programming.
Hence many stemians eventually choose to leave to resume life pre-steemit or resume life with facebroke. Heck, most don’t even stick around long enough to learn how to properly neglect their Steemit account (aka delegate their 2 or 20,000 Steem to @minnowbooster or @buildawhale before going on a haitus – think @neilstrauss)
Anyway, obviously the cost of time is one of the reasons for attrition today, agreed?
To be effective in retention, Steemit needs to at least give the appearance of valuing people's time (so the masses feels like their voice can be counted somehow even when they don't yet swim in pools of steempower). Nor do steemit value a verified account (vs. someone's 5th account or a bot), nor do steemit value communities&cultural connection, and honestly steemit currently barely values different nations.
I’m not trying to argue the value of collectivism vs. individualism, nor the correlation of mass or herd mentality vs. the weight of the elected erudite. I'm just saying, is it not possible that when proof of brain was introduce in the white paper, not enough though was put to consider the wider factors that support that said collective value that should be definate as proof of brain(s)?
 source pinterest
Honestly, I do not wish to argue @teamsteem, but I do wish to open dialogue so you big fishes (and aquatic mammals) can hopefully run with great ideas regardless of the origin (aka will you listen wether i own lots of steem, or share in a post, or just a humble reply to show support to the poster).
Here is a thought experiment:
Imagine if 100 minnows with phds put in 500 great ideas for accelerated hyperbolic growth, and they post it on utopian.io, also these 100 minnow are not social adept with 10-20 years of blogging charisma, and are unfortunately also introverted geeks they shy away from developing a broad social connection so would not be comfortable building new network of friends on steemit, and also they post with zero Steem (God forbid with their academic pay they don't have $500K - today, or even $100K - 6 months ago...or maybe in 6 months time....just to pluck down 500,000 steem to have their voice heard). In this case, after 7 days.....who would listen? Who would upvote? Who would re-steem?
If you saw such a respond, would you listen to these gem in the rought of wisdom that would bring value to the world but alas only lacks Steem and Upvotes?
Would you upvote them 100%, and act like a 3rd party champion to push the ideas forward, knowing you will not ever get back an equal $1 for dollar gain, would you have the foresight, maturity, and long term patient to count on the long game of Steem appreciation?
I seriously don't think @ned, @sneak, or anyone else still active in steemit would care to hear a suggession box idea of ideas unless it's coming from dolphine or wales, OR maybe they are to busy implementing functionality on steemit, so at the peril of mainstream adoption, they forgot to work on critical tweaks on the steem blockchains that need to take place to better reflect ‘proof of brain’ and retain users.
So @teamsteem, will you take this respond as a challange, as an argument because my low-steem-minnow status currently can't stand equal footed in the caste circles of steemit?
Ok, lets test this, how would you feel if I said this:
>Most whales give more than they receive if not all whales.
Most whale will **never** get more than they receive, that's a mathematically impossibility when only 20+million steem has been paid out but over 250million Steem is pre-created and owned by so few (there would be at least possible no matter how improbably if it was a plurality of founder & whale ownership, but we don't even have that in steem)
Think of it this way if Steem was to be compared to Bitcoin. Then it means Satoshi Nakamura mined bitcoin for 10years, then when he has 13 Million bitcoin, then he shared blockchain with the world in 2019 where there will only be 11 Million bitcoin left to be shared by everyone else….how fast do you think Bitcoin adoption would have taken place?
Not saying this is a bad model to start with. But I am saying what can steemit do with that bulk stash of Steem to help bring a better proof of brain model and especially accelerate adoption?
> None of the whales are in the best paid authors.
It depends on what you define as best paid authors, if we talking about whales who post regularly (even those who just give updates), then the $amount of whales earning / (divide by) number of said whales compared to the $amount of (orca or dolphin or hero or minnows or whatever dust) earning/ (divide by) number of said cast who post regularly, then that fact is clearly wrong.
I would go even further to say no other caste (even orcas at 50-100K Steem) earn more per cast member than whales who consistently post.
Why?
Because the system currently skew too much to reward the kissassory of Steem wealth, and it's not the whales fault. It's the system (blockchain rules). They (bulk Steem owner) just collectively don't have a solution (yet)
Look even if every whale say >500K to over millions of Steem (or 400K, or 300K, or even less say 250K whales) blocks all income for all their post (so payment is reserved for orca and below)....nothing much will still change. That is how static (and unhealthy) this system is currently.
Now that you are made aware (hopefully not feeling argued at or even challenged, if you do, I again apologize and hope you can still find the greater will to listen on).... here are some ideas I can share but yet I can't even upvote you a single $1?
![awareness.jpg]
More…brain dump of idea:
Idea 1:
When a whale (or anyone) refuse income -> 100% of the income goes to curation and replies
Not sure why this is not even the default...sounds like a no brainer when curation/feedback/reply/repost all add great value/encouragement/inspiration to the poster and others creating a positive feedback loop of additional proof-of-brain.
Idea 2:
The max time of curation should be set by the poster.
From what I understand it’s currently optimised between 20mins to 30mins, but what if the poster/writer knows his audience best? Why can he set it between 20mins to 24hours (1 day), encouraging his international followers (who sleeps and wake up at different time of the day) to upvote and also have a say and get rewarded for curation.
Idea 3:
The pay out duration should be increase 3 blocks of time instead of just 1:
1. 7 days - still paid at full value 100%
2. 30 days
3. 1 year
This will encourage people & organization (and google, etc) to mine and also posters to create long term value in their posting.
This will also encourage people to post things and upvote after 7 days…and they can ignore post after 7 days for those meaningless post.
Idea 4: (repeated from above - important becuase it values collective time)
Use multiple with the multitudes vote (repeating above example)
Introduce a concept like key-voted to represent the vote of the multitudes .
Summary: key-voted appies to only 1 account once a 24 hours - so this vote factor is not wealth dependent but a co-orporative value), like if 100 key votes = 1.01 x regular steem payout, 1,000 key votes = 1.1 x regular steem payout, 10,000 key votes=2 x steem payout
Note: We can cap this multiple at 0.0001% of Steem market cap or currently about US$200, heck even better if it scales.....so if poster & top curator with 1500 votes post and zero whale participate they still get minimal x1.15 Steem Basic Payout
Idea 5:
Limit automate bot curation to allow support of only minnow-esque size accounts:
Automated cap on paid self upvoting bots, and have it programmed into the steem code by say limiting paid bots to selfvote only on account with Total (steem+sbd+steempower+delegatedsteem) < .001% of MarketCapofSteem/SteemCurentPrice (About 2500 steem currently, so when steem=$10 and assuming still 250Million Steem token, it's 250 steem)
Full reasoning and possible implementation to verify human upvote for large steem account, see my reply here:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@michaeldavid/what-the-hell-a-fucking-rant-by-michael-david#@dj123/re-transisto-re-michaeldavid-what-the-hell-a-fucking-rant-by-michael-david-20171031t131127275z
Idea 6:
Formalize pools of Steem to support communities, culture, nations
Look, if Steemit and founders is going to own >50% of all Steem - ideas like these needs to be considered.
Example:
Consider concept lilke this @steemit.NameOfNation will be delegated 1k by default of steem for approximate every 100k/1million users from each nation joining steemit, so eg. so if 100million people signup and identify with @steemit.India then 50KSteem will be delegated to support their bloggers & topics on ideea, and other people can delegate to that pool to strengthen that resources to help the bloggers of their nation of those who support India per say. Delegated the authority with a pool of national witnesses.
...i tried editing, but gave up....not motivated todo so honestly. I suspects only a handful of folks will read this through.