> The current system favors those who do engage in absolutely no work, aka proof-of-no-brain-needed. How could it be worst?

Indeed..

> That would be irrational. Linear devalue the whole platform and thus Steem.

Not sure if I'm willing to concede here with that statement, but I get what you mean. It'll be a hardsell for anyone who can put their fingers together in figuring they're being shortchanged immensely for the system.

> Regarding slightly superlinear, I think it would only slow down the desirable effects of superlinear.

Yup, our proposal here is an in-between solution for the individual and the collective. I think there's good evidence that n<sup>2</sup> did not work as well as expected. Sure it amplifies and contrasts contributions to the greatest degree, but are users generally happy? Maybe in a purely elite community. I'd give it to Dan for figuring out that linear is highly undesirable in first pass though. That's certainly not something that's obvious to most developers.

I think a good way to fix steem's voting problem is to give big votes to all the guys from Portugal who have an idiot photo as a profile photo and whose nickname starts with a "d" and ends with "nunes"

Let's make it n^99999 so no one has any influence at all, good idea dude, you must be great at economics and by your suit I can see that you know what people on modern social media are engaged by.