In response to recent discussions regarding reward-curves adjustment and curation-rewards-removing.
The problems
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 Proposed Decoupling
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.
- Existing: calculate the individual post rewards based on votes and a curve, then cut 25% for splitting among curators.
- Propose: split the main pool 75/15 between a post-pool and curation-pool, then calculate individual post reward and curation reward, separately.
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.
Conclusion.
The proposal solves nothing but clears the way to finding solutions easier.
Open for discussion.