So what will the voters get? Nothing? So why bother voting for others? I guess the bots will post rubbish replies on every [good] post and vote for themselves, normal users will have no chance to down-vote them all.

I welcome the change. Will evaluate further after implementation.

Great changes, this should normalise the voting madness. Any eta? 

Any news on referral program?

I really like the adjustment, especially because of the ability for everyone to get higher rewards and also to encourage the discussions. Great work.

I really think this changes will promote the use of steemit, posts will have more comments and replies and this is a good thing. Well done!
__Question:__ Will this change the current curation payout for the 4th of posts already created or will it apply to all posts from now on?

Thank you for elaborating on the new algorithm.  I believe that this succinctly states what is the purpose (quality content creation and discussion) and how this new algorithm will reward it.

I am confused, however, regarding how the reward for voting other people's comments work.  Is it still the same mechanism where you contribute some amount of rshares based on your steem power available at the time?  Is it still a maximum of 5% of your total available voting power?

How is it determined that a user receives activity rewards in voting?  I see that you say that there is no difference if you vote more than once in 24 hours versus only voting once.  What does that mean with respect to your payout if you vote for one post that is more popular than another?  You get rewarded the same regardless, from what I understand?  

In essence, it is then more beneficial to comment on the posts you like with meaningful discussion.

Just trying to wrap my head around the new rules.

I am very happy about this change. It definitely givea people an incentive to add tk the discussion rather than simply clicking the upvote button. I was personnaly doing it without ever considering the payout and I was getting of wondering if it was too late for me to vote (whenever a post already had 50 votes and 2k in payout...why waste my vote?)

2 thumbs up!

Awesome guys! 

It's like you've taken all the best comments and then wrapped them up with your philosophies.

For me this comment sums it up:

>Cognitive Load
>
>People face a cognitive load trying to figure out how and when to vote. This makes voting stressful and causes people to vote less than they otherwise would. 

I definitely felt that and I stopped voting on comments that I really wanted to because they were being kind about my writing or making a great point.

Thanks guys, I really think this is a fair way to go, obviously there will still be some that won't be happy; you can't please everyone, all the time. But this is the best solution I think, activity is the one for me.

I have just done an article with 16 responses, which is the most I've had and that pleased me more than higher earning ones with no comments.

Quick Question: Does my accidental down vote of my own post matter less now; did it ever matter?

Sorry 2 QQs: Does cancelling a down vote still reset rewards and is that resetting just for the day; or all of time up till that point?


Cheers
*[CG](https://steemit.com/@cryptogee)*

This sounds great! I'm a new member here and haven't been here for more than 50 hours or so.. So I can't say how things have been working earlier, but what you've suggested above sounds outstanding!

>only accounts with simple posting authorities consisting of a single key can qualify for activity rewards.

Could you please elaborate what this means?

The change is a bit drastic, although the eventual outcome is intended as an improvement,  we need to see how this change will effect rewards on the 4th, maybe @arhag can enlighten us.  To me the 4th is just another day when it comes to steemit, but it seems we started the fireworks a bit early for some.  This might be our biggest debate yet, just like the one that happened a little while ago with bitcoin's block size.

" only accounts with simple posting authorities consisting of a single key can qualify for activity rewards.  There is still the n^2 rule which means that voting for yourself will cause you to earn below-average returns compared to voting for others." These statements by @dan need some clarification. or anyone who understands them.

Just went through this to understand curation better and indeed it was helpful.
However I do have a question, I am still not receiving curator rewards despite having upvoted a few of the trending posts when only a few had upvoted at the time.
Your time and attention is greatly appreciated!

It's great that the people who have the ability to make changes on this site are evaluating everything that is happening here, and making changes that should benefit the majority of people who are active here.  The list of things they found is well presented and the solutions seem to make sense.  I'm happy to see this great site get even better!

*To minimize abuse and/or delegation to bots, only accounts with simple posting authorities consisting of a single key can qualify for activity rewards. If you attempt to use advanced multi-sig configuration on your posting authority then you will not quality for activity rewards.*

Couldn't the bot owner just remove the extra key? I don't understand how a multi sig configuration would select for bot owners in the long run.

@dantheman what about @killerstorm proposal? Will you implement it? I thought you liked his approach?
 https://steemit.com/steem/@killerstorm/why-steem-curation-reward-is-needlessly-unfair-and-how-to-fix-it

https://i.imgsafe.org/085b08e844.jpg

Am I still better off having all my Steem Power on one account, or was that only for the voting-rewards?

### **Please correct me where i'm wrong**
**" Any content that isn’t worth discussing is probably not worth rewarding "**
This sounds to me that we urge you to write or share  posts that is dear to the current community and we discourage you to write anything else. Just write how you like steemit and introduce yourself ( how was your life so far as we are something like a reality show). Try as hard as you can to not guide thematology.

**" It has become clear that Steem is evolving toward rewarding original content over rewarding cross-posting content. We need to maximize the incentives for original content creators above all. "**

This sounds to me that  we don't like variation.  When you look at the front page of any social media think what you are doing. You scroll down, check different topics, you pick what interest you and you read it. Not only because you want to learn something ,or motivate yourself but to get news, have fun, pass your time. By doing this, there is no point for someone to post news or something funny or anything else like kittens  :) because he or she will get a 0. No motivation there. You get traffic by cross-posting content and that's what we need. Everyone is trying to write his unique or not article  and thumbs up for doing it, but we lack of a powerful feed. And here is where i ask, what are we trying to accomplish? Do we want this place to be an e-magazine with a few good writers and people who just read this place or an interactive social media, in which everyone posts anything and people talk about, agree or disagree ,fight or make friends

**" Activity Rewards
These rewards are distributed proportional to the amount of Steem Power your account has"**
**" Comment Rewards
Comments at any level will divide up the $2,500 proportional to the total amount of Steem Power voting on the comment."**

My opinion is Steem Power to get  something indeed this is the core of everything  but not have a huge impact

Excuse me for the long comment

Generally I think these proposals are good. More rewards for authors. More rewards for consistently active users. Thumbs up to those!

My concerns are around the comment reward. Whilst I agree there should be more rewards for good quality comments, aren't there risks with these proposals, namely
1. whales (or anyone else) could create a bot that looks for posts over a certain value, (say $1000) and adds a generic comment e.g. "Great post" and upvote its own comment in order to gain a slice of the rewards.

2. are there any measure to prevent spam commenting? i.e. a whale (or anyone else) could auto-comment and self-upvote an optimum amount of times (say 5 or 6) on  posts over a certain value (e.g. $5000), to get a greater share of the commenting pot.

Rather than adding to the quality of the discussion, this could clog up the comments with 'spam reward-seeking comments.' This would be worse than having a limited number of genuine comments.

I take it comments rewards are not weighed in favour of those who commented earliest (e.g. like voting rewards are)?