Increasing posting fee is the wrong way.
Taxation is always a problem. Raising it doesn't affect the big fish: they spend more but
- they have the funds to support the increased fee;
- they will receive sufficient rewards to justify the publication expense.
The smallest fishes and the newcomers: for them, however, the fee increase will mean an extra barrier to publishing posts and participating in a platform like this.
The only effect of raising fees will be to discourage the use of the platform by those who might start using it, and - consequently - reduce the growth of the ecosystem.
Third: I saw you regularly vote your self with a big vote power, so it seems to me you are not a so-innocent soul for the Blurt ecosystem, in the same matter of the ones you indicate in your post and - maybe - many other ones. I don't have anything against you, but it's certainly a bad way to search the "good health" of the ecosystem.
The "health" of the ecosystem - considering what happens on the platform - doesn't exist because there are too many people with great voting powers who vote themselves, resulting in an increase in the gap between large and small users. And this is a fact, independently of the motivation of all the various involved actors.
https://blurtseven.com/
nothing wrong with voting on your own posts, I assume you came here from Hive where such behavior is considered wrong. You should vote on your own posts. Higher fees won't stop ecs but can stop accounts like: @njrahman and several others
who?
if they don't spam then they will earn enough BLURT to pay fees
No: if the fees increase, the smallest fishes and the newcormers will spend more, and they will have a bigger harm than the big fish. If they want to spend, no problem, it is a choice, but they have to spend more: this is a fact.
The one I met on Hive and the one you are talking about are the same type of matter: personal policy, that various user wants to apply. The fact is: you receive votes by personal bots, or you vote your self, or you enter multiple voter accounts' circle: in any case of the mentioned, you are removing funds from the reward pool distribution. Personally, I don't have anything against this type of action if you don't receive reward, but it is a problem if you receive them and a big vote power is involved in this action, because, as I previously wrote, you remove tokens from the reward pool.
The percentage of self-vote is referred to the total votes. Sometimes I met your post, and sometimes I found your vote on your own posts.
The users who vote their self: on your posts, today and various ones I read in the past - sometimes - you mentioned a few of them, often involved in other practice your policy considers wrong. So, I imagine yours is a rhetorical phrase only.
To ending and closing discussion: I am not interested in argumentations, I only view the facts derived from everyone's action. I see this type of policy and see you or other ones with performing it. So, considering the function of the platform, I well-know that investing in Blurt is the way in which I will make rich the big fishes and not the common users; so, I will avoid spending value in it, if not my time only. That's it. I leave you a regard 🙂