![image.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/hpiynhbhq/image/upload/v1517237202/erkegfchlilqvfofymlt.png)

#### Components
Similar to the Voting Power mechanic where a user's own votes begin to scale downwards if used frequently over a period of time. It integrates into the natural mechanic of the ecosystem, utilising well known principles.

![image.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/hpiynhbhq/image/upload/v1517236380/mxzpmlq8avaaqmhqo30d.png)

#### Proposal
One of the most talked about situations on Steemit is when a high volume author begins to attract consistent high value upvotes. The impact of this is that a single user can begin to dominate the daily reward pool, moving contributions away from the other users in the ecosystem.

It has been demonstrated that the sole mechanic for reward pool control, flagging, has proven ineffective as a measure of control. Another method must be implemented.

At the moment, you cannot abuse the upvoting system through repeated votes as your power is gradually reduced to a point where it has less of a reward ratio. The same system should be implemented for posting.

An authored piece would carry a higher power in terms of an action, whereas a comment should carry a lower power in terms of action, so as not discourage interaction with the community.

There are two options to take with regards to what a lesser Posting Power looks like.

##### Option 1 - Reduced Reward Ratio

Simply put, the potential amount you can be rewarded with on a post is reduced. At full power, it is as it is now. At 50% - using an arbitrary and non-definitive figure - you receive only 50% of what you would usually have earned on a piece.

There is a negative to this action. By reducing the reward level for the post, you are reducing it for the curators on the post. 

##### Option 2 - Increased Curation Share

As the Posting Power reduces, the amount made available to the curators is increased. At the moment this is stacked 75%/25% in favour of the author. This can gradually be moved towards 25%/75% in favour of the curators.

This would help grow participating users on posts. However there is a question mark over the value that the commentators would offer, thereby fostering drive-by-posting for rewards and bot commenting exploitation.

##### Option 3 - Reduced Reward Ratio With Full Power Curation

As Option 1, except all curators on a post receive rewards as if it were posted at 100% power. I believe this option to be the one that is not as simple to game while also not being too detrimental to that larger commenting community.

#### Benefits
There are several benefits here. The impact of high volume posters would be reduced, thereby correcting an imbalance in the system. The usage of high volume posting comment bots would at least be challenged, as their reward ratio is significantly reduced.

This issue is a current hot topic on the ecosystem and there seems to be little in terms of addressing it. Community action has had a limited success, as has negotiation with those in need of reward curbing.

This negativity is projected externally and acts as a detractor to the SMT project. It needs to be addressed at an ecosystem level. There are always going to be ways for people to exploit, but mechanics like this and the [generosity indicator](https://utopian.io/utopian-io/@ura-soul/steem-improvement-a-generosity-rank-algorithm-a-method-of-increasing-post-quality-that-promotes-a-reduction-of-payout-pool) ensure that we can continually strive to ensure a level playing field for all.

<br /><hr/><em>Posted on <a href="https://utopian.io/utopian-io/@fourfourfun/steemit-should-implement-a-posting-power-mechanic">Utopian.io -  Rewarding Open Source Contributors</a></em><hr/>