Well, you're at least one of the first to make an argument for auto-voting. I think the payout for such auto-voting is too high, but I understand your view point. Anyways, my opinion on this was never

At the end of the day, I think all this boils down to whether people think auto-voting is good, bad or neutral. From comments so far, seems like not many people mind it, and some like that it encourages

Yes, but unfortunately I'm afraid the economics are lost on the average person. I suppose I should have anticipated that. Looks like the idea is dead in the water, but it wasn't dear to my heart to begin

I agree that curation is not a high priority. I've only bothered to suggest this idea because it's a change that can literally be made in a day. Anyways, based on responses, I get the impression no one

It's always amazing to me how every proposal is always assumed to be "for whales against minnows". In my opinion, this proposal has the same impacts on both classes of stakeholders. So far, the

As I said, I'm not wedded to this proposal. It's the simplest thing I can think of to reduce auto-votes. Whether that's really beneficial or not we will probably only know if we try it. It's a simple change,

Another option I have been thinking about (which is more work) is to allow people to opt out of the voting game and just earn a straight return on their HP. So we divert a portion of the current reward

IMO, it's not working that well. But the proposal is intended as an experiment to see if things improve or not. It's a change that could easily be reverted if it doesn't work out.

Because that's literally almost all the major investors here, assuming you mean manual voting.

I don't have a problem with some inflation per se. I just like it to be directed towards useful work. I don't think auto-voting is useful work.

I did mention that I wasn't sure if the .5% yearly drop had happened yet :-) Thanks for clarifying it has.

It's not really changing the incentives to invest in Hive. It's changing voting incentives. The amount of lost curation rewards is exactly balanced by the reduced inflation.

I'm not sure how all this is calculated or it is possible but would there be someway to differentiate accounts that are auto/bot accounts, be it bid bots or autovote bots/proxy voting and introduce some

I don't think this will have any particular earnings impact on smaller accounts versus other accounts. What it may impact is "perceived" income, since people often ignore inflation-based losses.

Authors would get the same rewards as previously.75% of the rewards that were previously distributed to voters would instead be indirectly distributed to all Hive holders (regardless of staking), because

It's a zero-sum change for Hive investors. Lowering the curation rewards also decreases inflation losses by the same amount.

Yes, I think there is an argument for that. One possibility would be to lower it to 1 month. I belief this idea had a decent amount of traction from stakeholders in the past.

I'm suggesting lowering the overall inflation rate of Hive by ~2% (e.g. less rewards paid = less inflation). So I think this is at minimum net-neutral to investors, and my belief is that it's net-positive

Should be up in 15 minutes or so.

Whitepaper is being written here if you want to contribute: