Actually, Steemit allows for people with high SP values to downvote if they feel like it. The vast majority of steemians don't have a downvote/upvote worth enough make a scratch against them.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Actually, Steemit allows for people with high SP values to downvote if they feel like it. The vast majority of steemians don't have a downvote/upvote worth enough make a scratch against them.
Yes, that is how Steemit was designed. High SP = more influence.
Yep. And it's a flaw that's killing Steemit, in the sense that those with influence can easily wipe out somebody with less influence.
So those people leave. People that see it happening leave because they don't want to invest into an account that can get easily wiped out.
And then pro-steemians defend that bullying? Weird, and doesn't attract more users.
Who is defending bullying here? Stake-weighted platforms are built on the idea that those with greater stake have greater proportional influence. Saying this is "killing Steemit" is like saying that fire is killing the sun.
I agree that power is abused, and am open to corrections being made there, in regard to large accounts wiping out smaller ones in one fell swoop, but the stake-weighting aspect is not the problem.
"but the stake-weighting aspect is not the problem."
How is it not the problem when it's possible to wipe out a smaller account?
I'm not saying stake-weighting on the whole is bad, I'm saying the ability to wipe out a smaller account is bad.
Right. Stake-weighting literally is Steemit. Adjustments to protocols can be made within that framework to help curtail abuses.