Regarding distribution. This was an issue whn i intered Byteball
and from what I can see, devs are still trying to give away
something for free to people without allowing them to cheat.
What's wrong with trying to minimize cheating? Would it be better if most bytes would be distributed to cheaters?
Unfortunately their methods have always proven exploitable so far.
My proposition to make byteball PoA (proof of advertisement)
where you have to write articles and make videos about Byteball
as a massive bounty to get any Byteballs was rejected.
I have been on Bitcointalk longer than my registered date shows. I can remember that there has been and still are many bounty competitions, which reward people for doing actual work, but these have been exploited too and IMHO, they were not that high quality to be beneficial. In reality, 21% of distribution fund that is left to distribute is too much to distribute on bounties alone.
There has been many work-based distributions and some of them have been exploited too:
* twitter bounty (was mostly spam)
* Crowdin translation bounties (no replaced with Utopian.io translators because random translators just used machine translation)
* bitcointalk signature campaign (was mostly spam)
* youtube video campaign
* 2 use-a-thons (one in university and another on Steemit)
* campaign for writers (just recently)
* campaign for bot developers (just ended)
* development grants (still open, many great stuff built with it)
* ... maybe some more that I don't remember
Goal is to have as wide and fair distribution as possible. Every distribution can be cheated so the idea is to find, which works best and find those where the amount of cheaters can be minimized using code.