On point one, isn't convergent linear simply a curve that's less than linear at the start gradually converging back to linear? The way you mention it above is as if it goes slightly superlinear? After it converges it will still be too flat, if you get me?

And I think the downvotes will actually be good because personally I actually want to flag spam more but it costs me so I don't do as much as I would like.

I'm going for indifferent now.
It is not up for debate if the proposals get implemented. It is only a question of when.

It is a good post nevertheless :)

Posted using [Partiko Android](https://partiko.app/referral/bluerobo)

Good post. When is the next hf though?

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
[![](https://s18.postimg.org/51o0kpijd/play200x46.png)](http://ec2-52-72-169-104.compute-1.amazonaws.com/ats-david__thoughts-on-the-steem-economic-improvement-proposal-eip.mp3)
Brought to you by [@tts](https://steemit.com/tts/@tts/introduction). If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

Delegations break the accountability and stake principle and, over time, skew the distribution even further. Some have put them to good use, but overall, the effects have been terrible.

I don't think anything in the EIP will help those who are just plodding along trying to make money with content; the accounts that are used to making money with money will simply adjust their algorithms and continue as before without even considering curating more or better. Outside of Steem(it), nobody has a clue what we're on about, so no effect there.

Having said that: there are only opinions on all this, no facts or useful theories that predict well, so let's just try and see what happens.

The fact that it will be breaking the author reward to 50/50 does not make sense to me.

I would not change anything but put more emphasis on the marketing side. That’s my opinion 

Posted using [Partiko iOS](https://partiko.app/referral/toofasteddie)

The proposed EIP changes is just a case of chasing our tail. Increasing curation rewards will do little. Bid bots will also get more curation rewards and the self-voting whales will collect in curation instead of author rewards. A lot of people bid-bot to save face and not to make money. To my knowledge, the only people making on bid-bots are the owners.

Vote buying is going nowhere and is even more prevalent on conventional social media. People talk about shadow-banning but on traditional platforms, EVERYONE is shadow-aded. It is pay to be seen out there or don't get seen at all and don't even see those you follow. Outside of the trending and hot page, that is not the case here, even with bid-bots.

There is no getting around bid-bots. They will simply go off-platform like with all other social media. Ever heard of click-farms? Do you really think potus and the kardashians have all those likes authentically? They don't.

That doesn't mean we can't make things better but shuffling around the same number of eggs in the same basket is not going to do it. We have to reward the behavior we actually want to see. 

My suggestions. Please see my response to another post from earlier. today.


>I think we have to give up the idea that producing quality posts is the raison être of the steem block chain. Certainly it is nice when it happens and that is always my intent but it is not necessarily what the block chain needs to succeed. 

>What we need is engagement, first and foremost. I have said before that we should junk the rep scores. They mean nothing and everyone knows it and instead institute an engagement score. We can get cute and call it a quotient (EQ). A perfect EQ is 1 and it is maintained through upvoting mulitple accounts (far too many to fake) and making unique and mulitiple comments. Everytime you upvote yourself, your EQ shrinks. So if you have a score less than 1, you will not receive the full payout of any post or curation. The difference returns to the pool.

>In this scenario, the use of bid bots serves to better the community. Because obtaining a bit bot upvote only gets a steemian half way to payout. Now he must engage with the platform meaningfully. Perhaps there would still be room for a steemian to upvote say one of their own posts a day, but then he would have to engage and upvote, in the very least, with those that left comments on his post.

>Community would be sustained and built. There would be more eyes on the page and ad revenue would grow and so  the price of steem. So maybe I would make less money on posts ( It will probably be the opposite) but now one steem is worth whole a lot more. Forget about altruism and do the math. 100 000 steem at 10 dollars a steem is worth a hell of a lot more than 300 000 at 30 cents.

>So I make more money for less work. One would assume that making a post is more work than reading and commenting and I let the system do the work for me instead.

>To bringing people on initially. Allow newbies to join and upvote and comment without having to open a wallet. Once they see others making money that they have no access to, they will educate themselves and might even pay a nominal fee to obtain a wallet.

#teamsteem

I think the flags will bring in a lot more risk for buyers, and while the bidbots in theory could get more, they need buyers that won't get flagged into loss territory so they can keep buying. This means that they will likely lower the bids to suit but then they need more buyers and posts, to vote on and they would likely get flagged a bit too. At some point, it will close the gap toward curation offering a more stable ROI than selling. 

Speculation, but I think that if people flag well enough, the randomization of rewards is much like what you talk about with the unpredictable vote values. 

At the very least, I think the changes are going to force a lot of reconsideration by pretty much all maximizer users and, will likely result in a lot more interaction, some of it will be very drama-filled.

The vast majority of steem stakeholders and witnesses don't care about improving the economic system because it's working in their favor, they are making tons of steem a day and they are the major bears responsible for sinking consistently the price of steem since the end of 2017.
<blockquote>We’ve given our top witnesses a chance to lead. They haven’t led.</blockquote>
That summarizes the whole story, the majority of the demand is coming from minnows and new users who don't understand the ecosystem very well. 
<p>The current ecosystem reminds me of a political dictatorship, the whales control the ecosystem and as long as it gives them profit they don't care about the others. Finally I do like your insights and I can't agree more, change is indeed a must!

A great critic. Is @ats-witness your witness account?

I'm just going to state my opinions/views here rather than writing up an entire post, as you have covered it here.


Each reward system has its advantages, so either one will suffice the need to monetize/tokenize any front end.

------------------

Curation rewards at 25% or at 50% won't change the world.

In fact either is cool by me as at the end of the day engagement is wanted, no matter what front end we are looking at.

------------

Rewarding "downvotes" = a pandoras box.

But if people want it, so be it.

I personally do not believe that this will end well. So far downvoting has only been utilized by very few people out there in a manner that adds value to any of the front ends.

Rewarding it, will just further enhance the BS and negativity that comes with the 99.99% of "opinionated" downvotes.

Human nature man, can't fix it!

---------------------

Although we may not be 100% in agreement here, we are not in disagreement either, as we see things from different angles, but at the end of the day Steem needs a lot more than just fiddling around with internal numbers to make it everything it can be.

Cheers.

Wau. You made ten bucks. What a waste of your time.

I think you're over thinking it, bidbots and large investors will find a way to leverage their downvoting power efficiently and that alone will clean the house and concentrate rewards to chain beneficial initiatives. 

Going to 50% curation reward will simply require much more downvotes to counter the circlejerks stacking votes on feel good content.

Vote buying won't go away with a simply more complex curved curve. Vote buying is not easily monetizable while it should be, so much so that all vote buyers eventually compete for near 0% profit as some have content they actually want to promote at a cost, some have content that will attract downvote or organic upvotes. If votes sellers are so obvious to detect they can be removed from UI views, or downvoted in a systematic manner.

I'd be interested to get on a discord call to discuss these things with you. 

BTW I fully agree with your take on SPS finding

I agree with 1 & 2 and I'm also filled with hope for 3...

I do believe we need a lot more downvoting on the platform, making a few of those "free" should help legitimize them as an integral part of the curation mechanism.

I don't think bid-bots or bot votes in general are the core problem, they can be used legitimately, in the end it's those users who use bid-bots daily purely for ROI with bare minimum effort in content production that drive the problem.

An increased risk of catching flags (and losing ROI) would hopefully put a dent into this content-agnostic reward farming behavior and decrease the demand for paid votes at the same time?!

I think you are right, but on the wrong premise...

This has not been a content driven platform for at least 2 years now.


Today the blogging part is a farming tool thanks to bidbots and a marketing tool for dApps and other derivatives of the money making crew.

Congratulations @ats-david! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

<table><tr><td><img src="https://steemitimages.com/60x70/http://steemitboard.com/@ats-david/commented.png?201906190717"></td><td>You got more than 9500 replies. Your next target is to reach 9750 replies.</td></tr>
</table>

<sub>_You can view [your badges on your Steem Board](https://steemitboard.com/@ats-david) and compare to others on the [Steem Ranking](https://steemitboard.com/ranking/index.php?name=ats-david)_</sub>
<sub>_If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word_ `STOP`</sub>



**Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:**
<table><tr><td><a href="https://steemit.com/steemtoolbar/@steemitboard/steemtoolbar-update-display-bug-fixed"><img src="https://steemitimages.com/64x128/http://i.cubeupload.com/7CiQEO.png"></a></td><td><a href="https://steemit.com/steemtoolbar/@steemitboard/steemtoolbar-update-display-bug-fixed">SteemitBoard - Witness Update</a></td></tr><tr><td><a href="https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitboard/do-not-miss-the-coming-rocky-mountain-steem-meetup-and-get-a-new-community-badge"><img src="https://steemitimages.com/64x128/https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmUphCGZFWgt6bJ1XTtunV7esnwy6bxnGqcLcHAV3NEqnQ/meetup-rocky-mountain.png"></a></td><td><a href="https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitboard/do-not-miss-the-coming-rocky-mountain-steem-meetup-and-get-a-new-community-badge">Do not miss the coming Rocky Mountain Steem Meetup and get a new community badge!</a></td></tr></table>

###### [Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness](https://v2.steemconnect.com/sign/account-witness-vote?witness=steemitboard&approve=1) to get one more award and increased upvotes!