Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Well I upvoted this because I like it.

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

How do you ask someone to power up $1M worth of Steem (a high-risk investment) and then expect them to give almost all their rewards away.

If earning less STEEM would lead to a higer STEEM price, I immediately would agree not to earn any single STEEM anymore ...
If supporting others and make them grow could extend the user base and thus make the whole blockchain more attractive for investors (who may only think it's worth to advertise and try to sell theirs products on a platform with a sufficient amount of active users), then I wouldn't actually call it altruistic doing so ...

The term.. give awards away is hysterical.

The stakeholders are entrusted with allocating the inflation to that which brings value. Not to use it as payment to themselves.

Would you mine (POW) a token that let those who mined the most previously get all the future mining.... :) Our DPOS is like a Democracy gone bad. Once the masses realize they can vote themselves a raise... it's all over but the crashing.

It is, but that's how people see it.

Oh I agree, it is viewed as their rewards.:) Not arguing just saying, that's so painfully frustrating and short sighted... Sigh.

!

there is no democratic element at all. This is the very point why Steem will die. It´s sad that people see self voting as proof of work. In two ways: first, this shows that they have no clue what POW means, second its the same shit murders do when they kill a child. They look for a reason why their action was justified.

Anyways, we will get our platform without "whales".

Wow...the more things change, the more they stay the same. I don't get the self-vote theory; mainly because the majority of Steemians don't have any value in their upvote. The last hardfork really put a dagger in the vote.

I enjoy Steemit because I simply have never been one to enjoy pointless social media. If technology doesn't serve as a business venture on some level, it's not worth my time/energy....jmho.

I've always felt Steemit had a plan up to a certain point; but, how to make it reproductive lacked fertility.

Lots of people made their millions...powered down...and well as I started...the more things change, the more they stay the same. That's not to include the continued dark start-ups that develop apps that pump and dump...

Peace.

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

7c steem? buying, but not based on games, smts, etc taking off. If they do cool, added bonus. Based on what we have, can have, right in front of us.

{reason to buy steem} i thought this would come from wanting to decide which authors blog made it to trending. Your voice / steem power to push them to the top, plus the fact that your making bank curating.

The problem with steem is that the incentives are not aligned. What I mean by this is that SP holders can allocate resources to themselves. Ideally SP holders should increase their holdings only if content creators do it at the same time. To get to that "ideal" situation we would need two things to happen:

  • Remove the ability to selfvote.
  • Remove the possibility to use alt accounts.

I have thought about this alot and I can't find a way to solve it. There are always ways to circumvent whatever measures we come up with. For instance, if we are able to identify who owns each account to prevent self voting via alts then the parasitic actors can resort to backroom dealings to bypass the system (for those who were not around this type of behaviour created some drama in the early days of the platform).

The next best thing would be to penalize alt account usage with a non-linear rewards distribution curve coupled with the possibility to negate rewards to those who insist on leeching from the reward pool. In other words the EIP is the next best thing.

Unfortunately a non linear curve has some dowsides, mainly that the bigger the wallet the bigger your influence will be. That's way the shape of proposed curve is very important.

Another measure that could be taken is to reduce the portion of the inflation that goes to the reward pool but that would hamper the token distribution which is anoher goal that we should also focus on.

If interested, just check out this idea concerning the reward curve.

Actually I remember reading your post back then. If I am not mistaken the shape of a Sigmoid_function is similar to the one on the EIP.

Yes, and I am in favour of the convergent rewards curve.

500mv influence cap, n2 to encourage max account value, flags for abuse, and we can get back to where we were before stinc, et al, hijacked pob to give us powallet.

For someone with your political stance it strikes me as odd that you would be in favor of and n^2 curve which only encourages an oligarchy to entrench itself. Why would you want to go back to the old days? Back then if you invested 10k USD your vote was worth a whopping 0.001...pathetic.

Putting a cap on the stake doesn't help, it just creates a point of equilibrium where whales start to power down and does not encourage further investment.

Loading...
Loading...