I think you didn't read the second part of my posting:
Even if you don't agree with me, there are many things more important than the "powering down" of the Steem whales. Steem will succeed if the developers decide to make it fully open source and change that infamous "no forking" license to MIT or GPL.
If you have fear of clones, then very probably you have something to hide. It would be also important to
make Steem a website-agnostic system, by providing "buttons" for every website that wants to use it as a monetization model.
I don't think you understand the power of compound interest.
When I started the other thread 10 days ago the @steemit account balance had 56 000 000 steem now 10 days later the balance is 61 000 000 steem. They have earned 6 000 000 steem or approximately 14 Millions dollar in 10 days eventhough they were powering down all the time.
But Steem is not a stable token. The Steem unit will be continously trending down, with the exception of very bullish periods. The measure you must take into account is:
Individual Steem Power / Total Steem Power.I don't question the point of view that Steem had an relatively unfair launch. But you could say the same of about 90% of all other altcoins. I'm still observing it. For me, the Steem Power concept is a very interesting model, very similar to what I've proposed in 2013 as "
Proof of Confidence".
But if the developers decide to mantain it basically centralized, it will fail, that's out of question.
Steem Power is inflationary, if there is less or even stagnant demand for steem then SP holders will lose money. The price of steem needs to go up or the system won't work, no one would want to lock their money for 2 years if it's devalued overtime.
To me the Steem Power concept is not very interesting for a simple reason that a huge amount of money is locked doing nothing, this is very stupid. Imagine all the real wealth you could create with all this money. Instead they prefer to create fake illusion of wealth.