//Update:
The code has changed, from ^2 to linear, so less penalty now, but still some. Link is here
// Update 2:
The penalty on voters goes to the author. So, potential (evil?) effective voting strategies:
- authors vote for self to earn more liquid SD, and dilutes later voters weight
- bots vote for the authors who agree to compensate (since authors will get more liquid SD, so even easier to compensate)
- greedy voters be more selectively
-----------Original post----------------------
According to the code, the new algo brings a huge penalty to early voters. The formula is
curation_reward_weight = standard_weight * [(now - post_create_time) / 30_minutes]^2
where standard_weight is related to one's steem power, voting power, and total weight of earlier voters.
It means
- if vote 30 minutes after a post is created, the weight for reward is
(30/30)^2 = 100% * standard_weight - if vote 20 minutes after a post is created, the weight for reward is
(20/30)^2 = 44% * standard_weight - if vote 10 minutes after a post is created, the weight for reward is
(10/30)^2 = 11% * standard_weight - if vote 5 minutes after a post is created, the weight for reward is
(5/30)^2 = 2.8% * standard_weight - if vote 3 minutes after a post is created, the weight for reward is
(3/30)^2 = 1% * standard_weight
Reference: latest proposal:
Our solution is to offer a reverse auction for curation rewards on votes cast within the first 30 minutes. The price starts out at 100% of your curation reward and falls toward 0% over 30 minutes using the curve (1-t2). The longer a bot waits to vote, the lower the fee will be. However, if someone else chooses to vote before you it would lower your potential absolute reward.