I mean, I'd say everyone should reject the package as a whole and then implement a package without the curve. You've all been aware of this problem the whole time, but it seems like it's been too late to change anything since it was announced. Someone has to be willing to do the right thing even when there's tremendous pressure to go along with what was decided by others.
Posted using Partiko Android
There was a lot of discussion about this prior to the hardfork being developed. There is consensus among the witnesses to proceed forward. You frame it as the “right” vs. “wrong” thing, but it is not that simple. I do not think that what we are doing is wrong, otherwise I would not be voting for it. The hardfork is the best deal we could come up with to try and fix our issues that could be developed in a reasonable amount of time and be accepted by a super majority of witnesses.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Fair enough.
You know how many of us are frustrated, though, right? There was to be community feedback on the proposed changes. Before we had a chance to point out the flaws and suggest fixes, it was a done deal. All we can do now is oppose it. And since the changes do especially benefit those with large stakes and we aren't far enough into this for the stake to have significantly decentralized, it's not something that even a bunch of dolphins can effectively oppose, let alone minnows.
It will be harder than ever to decentralize, as the funds will flow to those who can get whale votes even more, which has always proved to be whales themselves.
We all hope I'm wrong at this point, but if hopes were horses, we'd be crushed in a stampede.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I do. There was a lot of feedback taken into account before consensus was reached. There was a lot of back and forth, push and pull. In my view, this really was the best possible deal that we could all reach. I am excited and hopeful that this HF will be a really big (positive) deal and that six months from now Steem will be a very different (better) place. I'm of course worried too, for all the same reasons that you are. The results of all this are going to be impossible to predict, so at this point all we can do is hope for the best and do what we can on an individual level to turn this into the place we all want it to be.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Which witnesses were pushing for the curve to be like what you landed on?
I'd love to see some whales commit to alleviating the reduction.
I proposed this to markymark and he seemed receptive, but I haven't seen anything since. I'll pitch it to you as well.
Create a whitelist of non-abusive users.
Delegate to a bot which:
Checks posts by users on the whitelist for vote values below the linearity threshold
Calculates what the Steem payout will be in EIP and compare it to what the same rshares would have been pre 21.
Upvote the difference so it pays out in Steem the same way it would have.
If this is really going to be good for everyone, the bot shouldn't be very necessary. But if it's terrible for most good users, it's absolutely necessary to keep this hf from punishing good behavior.
I'm especially worried about comments.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If anyone wants to put in the work to do this, they can use the SPS to request funding.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
@holger80! You should totally do this.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Sps projects get voted for by stake weighting as well, though right? So what are the chances something that benefits minnows at the expense of whales would ever be approved if we can't even stop the excesses of EIP?
It seems small users are up the proverbial creek insofar as control over their destinies is concerned.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Does it have to be framed as a zero sum game? Believe it or not, there are stakeholders here who see value in rewarding users who are contributing value.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Here's a major point that I'd like to make.
As a stakeholder, I find I disagree with the largest stakeholders about what kind of content brings value to the platform. Under 20, fair enough: I upvote what I like with the stake I purchased, you upvote what you like, and we're both rewarding content relative to the amount we spent on our stake.
Under the new system, I can't offer proportionate value. I like the content of small communities, niche interests, and people who have interesting conversations via comments.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It doesn't have to be, but it's seemed more like a negative sum game so far. I think I'm losing your good will, but it should be re-emphasized. These changes make it even easier to extract value for the people who have the most to gain by the rise of steem. And they do so at the expense of making it harder to extract value by the many who are not yet heavily invested.
There are lots of good people on this platform, absolutely. You're probably one of them. But just because you're a good person doesn't mean you know what's best or understand what it's like to feel pleased about a post worth 3 Steem. That's the reality for most good users. The abuses targeted by the linear curve get closer to sixteen steem, sure, but I don't know a single person personally who gets or gives 16 Steem votes to comments.
All these good people? It's why so many people are committed to Steem. But since the get go, I've seen people warp their behavior to fit the interests of the people with power and money.
I'm not trying to be mean or pessimistic. There are just a lot of people here already who are the target users. The earliest and/or wealthiest adopters are not representative of "the masses" but they all seem to think they know what will attract "the masses".
The promise of Steem is great, but, for all that witnesses may have gone back and forth before reaching consensus, there was not nearly enough communication.
This was all over the place, but each point is relevant.
I hope it won't feel too disappointing that we can no longer express our appreciation for comments without sacrificing value. I hope all the downvotes on abuses will lift the 8b rshares posts to 16 Steem.
It just seems unlikely, and there doesn't seem to be a plan for if it doesn't work.
Just speaking for myself, the platform doesn't seem broken the way witnesses talk about it. I get there are abuses, but they seem like they require attention, not EIP.
Again, I wish we could have had real conversations with users on chain.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
By the way, I consider myself a stakeholder.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit