With the recent hardfork we saw the number of ideal 100% votes per day get lowered, but also at the same time their power was raised substantially. Ultimately this was implemented in order to make newer users feel like they were actually contributing to the system by having an actual impact on the dollar amount. It succeeded in that regard, but ultimately I think it was a step a bit too far in the right direction that ends up centralizing the system more than it should.
The biggest problem we had before the hardfork was that because the ideal target number of 100% votes was so high, many people either didn’t bother even voting, or left the site because they could vote even a penny. While I agree this was not ideal, we definitely saw many accounts grow during this period and many more people actually were making money off their articles. The only real problem it created was an inflated steem dollar price way over the pegged amount. The hardfork has definitely fixed the peg problem, but I fear now it will push it too far in the wrong direction.
The good thing about having a large amount of votes per day for people who were invested was that we could support a larger amount of audience and it heavily incentivized against lazy curating. Right now instead of seeing many people spread their voting power out, they are all incentivized to vote on the same 10-20 people every single time they post an article, leaving many people out of the loop now. People, who are creating good content and deserve to be making more than pennies.
While the small ideal voting target doesn’t mean people cant spread out their curations, it does mean that many people simply don’t have to put the work in. I have always been of the thought that the ideal target amount should be at a level where most people have to work to reach, ultimately rewarding those who put the effort into voting, more. I personally save a majority of my voting power for the people who comment on my articles in order to help spread the wealth. I don’t think that is currently happening now.
This is coming from someone who has actually benefitted from the hardfork, but I don’t think it leads to long term survivability within the platform. I would rather see the money more spread out and have the ideal vote target at an amount that forces people to actively curate. Personally I see this target at somewhere between 20-25 votes per day. I think this amount is a healthy medium for many people on the platform who still want to see their votes have power, but at the same time, be given the change to succeed. I want to see a plethora of content, not just the same 10 people on the front page everyday. Incentivization is the most powerful tool that the developers have, so by incentivizing people to all upvote the same 10 people, were doing a disservice to the platform as a whole.
Thanks to @Elyaque for the badges