Ok, number one is legit.
Number two and your example are not, imo.
When you pick a winner to receive special treatment in the math from tptb you disadvantage everybody else.
You make all the speech from everybody else less valuable/visible.
I get that you want to share the wealth and be a good influence on the platform, but this is not the way to do it.
Central planning is what we are trying to escape.
If an author is making $10 a week he is doing just fine without any help from you.
My reading of the math makes this unviable as a replacement income in the US economy, the rent is just toooo damn high, but the folks in the less expensive areas are likely to have the loose change laying around to invest a couple dollars to receive life changing values in return.
If I could bring in 10usd a day, I'd be back in Aca setting up my cyber right now.
If you really want to help the folks that cross our threshold, power up by delegation all the newbs up to 500 sp so that they have some impact on the numbers that they can (barely) see.
If you wanted to make it seemless the sp delegation would taper off as they near 500 of their own sp.
If you want to build a middle class, make a vote multiplier contingent on a targeted amount of sp.
For instance:
100sp=1.001 vote multiplier
200sp=1.002, etc.
Pick a number to start lowering the values, say:
100,000sp=2.0
100,100sp=1.999, etc
In this way you encourage folks to A. post, B. hodl sp, C. like the game more, and D. give sp more value.
Anyone above dolphin size, though not necessarily penalized, should be encouraged to do other things.
I base this on the assumption that the reward pool will never be large enough to make everybody happy.
If folks need a longterm store of value they can buy sbd/btc.
If they want to be rock stars on Steemit, they can do that, too.
Provided they don't let it go to their heads and start eating our small fry, again.
My two cents, #m2c, thanks for taking the time to ponder them.
