![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmXAZoQGQY41c7Lii6Q1SK5ubPcKAudj6Yr6fu9RhQiuM1/image.png)


I think that without investing money into steemit it is very hard to gain steem power and have your votes heard. I have also seen quiet a few bot accounts the have low ratings but spam posts. I was thinking as an incentive to encourage both commitment and help minnows there could be a boost for low steem powered posts.

For example a completely new account (less than 0.051 steem power and say less then a week old) with 25 rating could get a 1% boost to total earned (from author and curation rewards).

Then an account with 26 rating could get a 1.1% boost. However if the account is between 0.5 SP and 1 SP the total boost is only 95% as strong so 0.95*1.1% = 1.045%. boost. The total boost could increase with rating and decrease with both age of account and total steem power so after the account hits say 50SP total boost is 0 and/or 1 year old. But be gradually phased out or increased short term with good reputation.

I think having it based on reputation allows people to down vote bots or copied content and upvote original work so it's hard to exploit the boost with multiple bot accounts. Also after a year or 50 SP the account would have followers if successful and so the poster is not encouraged to switch accounts to regain a boost. It should hopefully make it just a little easier for new accounts and provide additional incentives to gain reputation. 

The biggest issue is where would the money come from. I think it would could be system wide donation based e.g. 100 steem donated to the cause and that spread about all the new accounts. However if using the boost system and lots of new account joined and total reward should be 300 steam. All boosts are scaled down by 1/3 so the very first example only receives 0.33% boost. However that would probably need a hard fork to implement.
 
It could also come from users having to sign up to a bot account then a similar distribution relying on donations however having to actively sign up would mean its not distributed to all users but wouldn't require protocol change.


I would also suggest a negative boost and the money not generated from that goes toward the positive boost e.g. a 15 reputation account should generate 100 steem from a post but has a 3% negative boost due to low reputation. This 3 steem then goes towards the positive boost pot. But that seems abit unfair to me, it could also be tackled as they don't get any boost (or very low) and that's there punishment for flagged content, of course this relies on people to flag for genuine reasons.

Every figure e.g. the 1% boost, removal after 50 SP or 1 year, amount it goes up with reputation or even the fast it goes up with reputation could be changed for desired effect up or down. And of course a cap on maximum boost should be made in the even an account reaches 70 rep overnight somehow.

I'm sure this could be exploited somehow but if its less exploitable than other methods (self voting, voting groups, bot voting, knowing all the whales etc..) then hopefully the positives would outweigh the negatives.

Let me know what you think. It's just a thought.

![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmVf3bFFjCsRgkP37ymbzeT6n9uxGRsvSMhUh2sTPS43wF/image.png)


Is it practical?
Is it even worth the effort if the boost is low and what should the boost be?
Don't like/like the idea of it in general?
How would it affect older accounts?
Not convinced anyone would donate and it would have to rely on generating more steem (and so more inflation)?


Image 1: http://www.rhfleet.org/events/power-inside-video-games
Image 2: http://deacondance.com/understanding-discernment/thinking-man-rodin/