Do your best to count the organic unique people posting and separate them from the bots now posting here. There can only be estimates, which you indicate you know damn well with that smiley. Arcange monthly posts stats relevant to such estimation, and I draw on them, as well as other metrics and people I consider reasonable and reliable judges. Make your best guess and substitute in your own numbers as you prefer. That will not change the reality but by fractional percentages, which are essentially immaterial to the point.

Do all bots owned bot the ~36 whales? How do you determine that they are all owned by the ~36 whales?

As with how you can't determine who is bot posting and who isn't. You can't determine who owns it if a bot is posting.

That changes your claim of we get the 1% and 99% goes to whales drastically. Because those are made up numbers. Anyone on the chain with a two brain cell can see that isn't the case.

You are just making arguments without any substantiating and I am refusing to entertain such arguments.

That was exactly the point of PoB. Because you cannot ascertain which post or comments are from bots, you cannot purpose to deprive them of rewards.

That isn't point of PoB, if you think that is the point the PoB then you don't understand PoB. PoB does not care about who creates the material, it only cares that material is created.

PoSV also does not say we should reward every comment, every post etc. If it is just an account spamming, "Thank you for your post" or such comments without any actual value, you don't vote for them. Problem solved.

A myriad of communities are potential and actual on Hive, and I am sure the Actifit community are happy you aren't the god of Hive able to smite them down. I do not particularly disagree with your sentiment, but I do disagree you should be the decider, and nor do I want intrahive wars over who has the right to post instead of 'Anyone can post anything.', as you point out in your comment. When Ned introduced the idea of communities, because it was tied to oracles communities had vastly greater potential than merely being a group with mutual interests. Communities were envisioned to be able to change how rewards worked, how votes worked, and to be able to be invite only or open to the public. When availed such enormous power to create variations on the basic platform communities would be able to demonstrate that one way or another was superior to other ways, and communities that adopted the best mechanisms would demonstrate the best user retention, and that would enable the platform to conquer the world.

We can differentiate bots from people. A variety of hashing mechanisms enables unique humans to be discerned and identified with each post. Such mechanisms Ned called oracles, and were integral to his idea to change governance of the platform from a plutocracy to a democracy. I remain convinced that change in governance is necessary for Hive to continue to exist.

Terrible idea, glad that was not implemented. And there is no hashing mechanism that would differentiate a person from a bot. Other than you giving up your biometric data and that is getting tied your account. Are you willing to give up your biometric data?

You first. Live by the standards you would force on others, or demonstrate your hypocrisy here for all to see. At least I posted numbers, and made effort to be reasonably relevant, rather than just speculating as you are without making the least effort to quantify even one single property or principle in the OP.

Posted made up numbers. Anyone can post made up numbers.

PoSV will improve Hive by 99%. See a number. That number means nothing because it is made up. Same as your numbers. If you come with a claim, you provide the actual numbers, actual data, actual sources. Not the others.

And asking me to quantify something that isn't quantifiable is just dumb. I do not make up numbers where there isn't numbers.

Edit: As to percentages of the take from the pool, that has been consistently growing in inequity from the advent of the platform. Some months back Holozor posted some numbers regarding distribution of rewards in reply to a comment of mine, and if you feel up to searching through our discussions using tools available on Hive, go ahead. I did draw on his numbers, but I have been discussing these matters with lots of people since 2017, and the inequity has only got worse. Back then it was about 90:10. Or you could work up your own estimations, as I did. If you don't want to hear mine, then make your own. It's hard to consider your criticism seriously when you have not made any effort to quantify anything at all.

And I found the comment you are talking about. There is nothing in it that support that 99% goes to 36 whales. On the contrary it supports that less than that is going to whales.

Lets say all the curation rewards, all the witness rewards, all hbdstabilizer rewards, all burns going to these whales. (Why would someone count burns as going to whales is beyond me.)

18% (30/160) of the reward pool goes to what hol0zor says actual authors. So according to you. 99% of the authors here must be whales' bots. Hopefully, you can see why that is an absurd statement.

And that is just by assuming, all other things going to those whales. But they also do not. I am not a whale, I receive curation rewards, many other people are not whales and receive curation rewards. Not all witnesses are whales.

So as you can see your claim that 99% goes to whales falls apart. Even the 10/90 split falls apart.

And I used the numbers that holoz0r gave you to disprove that notion. I did not bring any other number into it. If you trust holoz0r's numbers, than those numbers disproves your claim.

Have a good day!