In response to recent discussions regarding reward-curves adjustment and curation-rewards-removing.
I think the majority in the community are against the phenomena of post-rewards over-concentration. But most of us also agree that a pure linear curve will just swipe away the incentive to curate better. So, the upcoming Hard-fork is suggesting a balanced curve which trying to tolerate in either direction at each ends.
There are many other suggestions e.g. removing curation rewards, none of them seems to be a good candidate for solution.
I can't provide a solution either, but would like to propose a way to make things easier.
The main obstacle here is we are trying to solve two/more problems with one single curve. That's like mission impossible.
I'm proposing that we cut the problem into smaller pieces, so that we could address each individually.
With this change, the amount of curation reward is no longer tied directly to post-rewards. Means we are able to adjust the reward curves separately and independently, to suite their own purpose.
For example, we could choose a pretty linear curve for post reward, while still using a non-linear (e.g. n^2) curve for curation rewards. A linear curve could address the over-concentration problem of post rewards, and making 'every vote counts'. While a highly skewed curve for curation reward might be a better choice to suite its objective of discourage self-voting and incentivice good curation.
The proposal solves nothing but clears the way to finding solutions easier.
Open for discussion.