<p>As of late, many people on the steemit platform have been complaining about the ever growing whales and their unprecedented power. And rightfully so! Currently, the top 212 steemit accounts control 88.93% of all <strong>STEEM</strong>. Yes, the numbers speak for themselves, a classic pyramid shape has taken its form.  </p>
<p><img src="https://www.steemimg.com/images/2016/07/26/wheatlthdistrubution7661d.png" /></p>
<p><br /></p>
<p>To improve upon the feedback and criticism given by the community, the steem team has been able to produce a few change that will probably lead to a slightly more fair distribution of wealth and visibility of  more peoples content. </p>
<p><br /></p>
<h2>The Solution: </h2>
<p><br /></p>
<p><img src="https://www.steemimg.com/images/2016/07/26/fork6271b.jpg" /></p>
<p><em>- a hard fork</em></p>
<h3><strong>Next hard fork</strong> scheduled for: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 15:00:00 UTC </h3>
<h2>What changes can you expect from the update?</h2>
<ul>
  <li>12 hours payout time instead of 24. - <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/177" rel="noopener">#177</a> </li>
  <li>2 payout cycles (one the fist 12 hours, the second during a 30 days period). - <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/177" rel="noopener">#177</a> </li>
  <li>Comment Spam improvements. - <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/176" rel="noopener">#176</a> </li>
  <li>Block size reduction. - <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/179" rel="noopener">#179</a></li>
  <li>Liquidity rewards disable in steemit internal market. - <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/178" rel="noopener">#178</a> </li>
  <li>CLI wallet bug fixes. - <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/184" rel="noopener">#184</a> </li>
</ul>
<p><br /></p>
<h2>What issues will be addressed in the new version of Steem? </h2>
<blockquote>Issue <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/176" rel="noopener">#176</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>Each root level comment has a reward weight which impacts the end  payout of the post. We are targeting 4 posts in 24 hours. Your first 4  posts in 24 hours will not be penalized. After that, they weight is  decreased from 100% based on your average posting frequency. Having a  frequency just barely higher than 1 every 6 hours will have very little  impact, while spamming will be penalized heavily. This change is aimed  to increase the quality of content at the cost of quantity. </blockquote>
<blockquote>Issue <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/177" rel="noopener">#177</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>Each discussion goes through a two stage payout. The first one is  nearly identical to what currently happens on a new discussion except  that we are weighting payout times by 12 hours instead of 24. This  should cycle through currently trending content quicker. There is a  second voting period set to 30 days after the first payout. This should  help posts that don't have immediate viral success accumulate votes and  have more consistent payouts in the long run. After the second payout a  discussion becomes &quot;frozen&quot;. The discussion is no longer editable and  new replies are disabled. Users can still vote on comments in these  discussions as a &quot;nod&quot; to the author without costing their posting power  or awarding reward shares. </blockquote>
<blockquote>Issue <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/178" rel="noopener">#178</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>There has been a lot of controversy surrounding liquidity rewards. We  are refraining from making a judgment at this point but want to spend  more time reviewing their impact. We do believe that in their current  form the liquidity rewards are simply too much for the value thy  provide. As such, we are temporarily disabling liquidity rewards until  we can design a better solution. In the meantime, a transaction fee free  market should be incentive enough for users to continue to use the  Steem internal market. </blockquote>
<blockquote>Issue <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/179" rel="noopener">#179</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>The average block size calculation is too high. We are reducing the  minimum block size limit from 128k to 64k and changing the average block  size threshold from <code>max_block_size / 2</code> to <code>max_block_size / 4</code>.  The net result is that the average block size threshold can be 4 times  smaller. If witnesses chose to vote this way, it will make triggering  transaction bandwidth limits easier, which is currently not applying  except in the most extreme circumstances. </blockquote>
<blockquote>Issue <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/184" rel="noopener">#184</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>Fixed a bug in the cli wallet that incorrectly allowed the wallet to  attempt to broadcast an update account operation from a locked wallet.  The broadcast would fail but created a poor user experience. </blockquote>
<blockquote>Issue <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/186" rel="noopener">#186</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote>Added recovery operations to account history so they can be tracked more easily.</blockquote>
<p>#steem #steemit #socialmedia #platform #updates #hardfork</p>
<p><br /></p>
<h2>What is your thought on the upcoming changes? </h2>
<h2>Will they have a profound affect on the way content is viewed and reached, and will it improve the current wealth distribution ?</h2>
<p><br /></p>