You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: As a top steem witness, will you support a hardfork implementing the “Economic Improvement Proposal” or “EIP.”
In this case, there is more to combining the items than just reducing hardforks. They directly interact. For example, reducing the cost of downvotes makes it more likely those seeking to avoid downvotes will shift to harder-to-find micropayouts. Thus #3 is the primary motivation for #2. Likewise, the game theoretic balance between curation earnings and self-voting earnings depends on the relative risk of being downvoted, so the size of the downvote pool (#3) and the curation share (#1) are not independent variables.
IMO one can reasonably evaluate this entire proposal as a coherent package and either accept it or reject it without considering it as an onmibus package of otherwise-independent items (as we have been asked to do in the past).