Dear @gandhibaba and everyone reading this comment
First of all: great choice of topic buddy. This is definetly very disturbing and important publication.
Since I've read post by @timcliff I couldn't stop thinking about consequences of this vital change. After all moving from "75/25" reward model to "50/50" is a huge deal.
I fully understand, that main idea behind such a change is to reduce abuse of some authors who self-upvote themselfs. But can it really be fixed ? I hardly doubt so.
Let's say that I self-upvote my own content. After HF21 I will receive less as an author from such an upvote. But it will be compensated with receiving more as curator.
Under this regime, the author will earn 50% of the payouts on posts while the curators will have to share the remaining 50%
In other words: content creators doing actual work will have it even harder to be rewarded. In order to get any rewards they need to create content.
At the same time curators do not need to do any work. After all they can switch on auto-upvotes and simply enjoy growing twice as fast. Basically we're moving away from rewarding those who create content or are authors of quality comments. Steemit will reward those people less.
My impression is that Steemit is turning into ponzi scheme. Investors will be rewarded for doing really nothing, but pretty much for holding their STEEM (and auto-upvoting any kind of content).
I would love someone to explain to me that I'm wrong and I do not see bigger picture.
BitBots and HF21
Now one more question that is on my head: would HF21 help or destroy bidbots? Most likely demand for their services will still be there and at the same time bidbots will be growing twice as fast as they do right now (after all curation rewards will be doubled).
Am I wrong? I'm badly trying to figure out how HF21 can help but all I can see is "huge opportunities for abuse" of Steemit platform.
IMPORTANT: I read and upvote all interesting comments.
Yours
Piotr
RE: Hard Fork 21: A Case For the 50/50 Curation Reward Model