I can understand your concerns. The straight up mathematics doesn't sound good for authors. The deciding factor will be people's behaviour. Will people (large stakeholders in particular) curate more content with higher curation rewards or will they continue vote selling, self-voting, and collusive voting? I guess we will find out soon enough. I recommend that you wait a few more months before leaving. Things could work out quite well.
Posted using Partiko Android
I have time until my power down will be complete (that I can begin when all my delegations are returned in 3 days)
However, I have faith in systems that treats people fairly .. and this proposal does not.
I've already explained how to make it more fair in the post, so I won't repeat it here lol... But that seems like a way to make the risk and benefit extend equally. And yet... That wasn't proposed.
Why should we rely on the masses to do "what's right" when the whole proposal is based on doing the greedy thing for investors/whales/orcas?
If we are hoping that human behavior will change for the better.... I would highly suggest that we don't count on that.
Everyone keeps saying that we should stick around to see if it's beneficial. You aren't the first and won't be the last...
But here is my point.
How can we trust them at all, even if it's temporarily beneficial...that they won't take more at that point! We can only look at their current behavior to determine that.
And that behavior points to greed that will continue, even when it puts the platform at risk.
Posted using Partiko Android