Honest question as to why new tokens are all implementing a brand new 50/50 split idea that hasn't even been tested thoroughly by tokens like palnet and hasn't been implemented by steem yet for a large scale test... yet everyone is heading that direction.
STEEM REASONING
... i feel like a lot of the reasoning behind Steem blokchain switching to 50/50 split in the upcoming HF21 is a commentary about Vote buying.
STEEM ENGINE TOKENS ARE DIFFERENT
However Steem-engine tokens that use SCOT distribution system are mostly all using 50/50 systems already
However Scot systems also have the ability to moderate their communities... in fact many of them set aside large pools used to moderate. Thus if they have an issue with vote buying they could do something about it if they want and don't have to depend on 50/50 splits.
It's also a little disingenuous looking when token creators give themselves massive amounts of free tokens seeming to solidify that they will continue to stay at the top. I'm not saying that should fully be a reason against... it just kind of looks bad since it is not value on top of tokens purchased or earned... it's high inflation on free/easy money.
MY QUESTION
- I would like to ask why these token creators AND the users are ok with and or prefer the 50/50 split.
- Am I missing something?
The best argument is that token creators are worried that users will dump these freely gotten tokens so a 50/50 split will help them value the tokens more? Do we know if this is working out well? Do we know if this will work better than 75/25?
Again my assumption takes into account that steem-engine tokens can and do use moderation abilities that can be hard-coded into the scot distribution system as well as moderation accounts with large amounts of voting power.
THE EXCEPTIONS
SteemAce is doing 60/40 i'd love to know why they went that direction? And why they didn't go further in that direction?
Another exception: SteemCoinpan is 45/55 giving the holder more of the cut for voting.
Why didn't some tokens go 40/60 if the reasoning is to incentivise people to hold their tokens and vote more. Why didn't they go further? 