This is an economics post trying to calculate the slightly positive effects of linear rewards on the reward pool distribution (potential 5% positive effect toward equitable distribution) followed by a discussion of the likely intensely enhanced clustering around limited numbers of posts. If you thought circle jerking was bad now wait until you see HF19!
The Basics of HF 19
Steemitblog annouced HF 19 and entitled it Linear Rewards.
So, "Linear Rewards" has gotten the most press.
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/2hfxx1-pre-release-hf19-linear-rewards
Linear Rewards vs Squared Rewards
The post doesn't detail it terribly well. So, here's my best explanation I can offer. When calculating post rewards there is a term called Reward Shares. I'm still digging into it, but my current assumption is that it's a function dominated by Steem Power. Right now when calculating your actual reward the backbone takes your amount of reward shares and squares it. In the new update it will take your Reward Shares unaltered.
Here's the coding changes.
What's the effect?
Well, distribution is such that 93% of the Steem rests in the hands of 1% of the users (excluding the steemit account, which would increase the number if it was included). So, whales basically dictate the rewards pool. Under Linear Rewards they will get 93% of the say because they have 93% of the steem.
That's an improvement over current conditions. Assuming they get 93% of say and I haven't totally misunderstood rewards shares and the calculated effect is squared they end up dictating 99% percent of the reward pool currently. (I think the math = 93^2/(93^2+7^2)= 99%). This doesn't happen right now because of "the non-voting whales experiment," but that's what could be happening.
Assuming 240M steem, 10% inflation, and $2.16/steem the reward pool is ~$50M/yr which works out to$137k/day. 85% of the rewards pool goes to authors and curators so, here's the net effect.
Whales control $115k/day now.
Whales control $108k/day after HF 19.
That's a modest change, so I'm happy to say it's a "shave" to their current influence on the platform now (aka whale balls). If all the whales come back voting hard though the shave won't be enough to account for the increased voting activity.
Overall, in theory it looks like a change of 6% of the say of how the reward pool is spent and that works out to about $7k/day towards better distribution control by smaller parties.
Keep in mind tho' that not all whales vote because of the experiment... so, what happens in reality is a little different than this. It's just meant to be a high level thought that suggests Linear Rewards is mildly beneficial for the common minnow in theory, but will probably have a negative impact overall if whales come back voting hard and don't stay experimental.
Vote Impact
The changes to the impact of a 100% vote are more material. A 100% vote will be 4 times more powerful once HF19 is completed. As it stands now a single 100% vote uses only 0.5% of your remaining voting power (voting power regenerates fully over a 5 day period). That means real users would need to vote 40 times a day at full power to use all of their voting power. This leaves users who are less active unable to fully leverage their voting power. After this change, a single 100% vote will use 2% of your remaining voting power, meaning that 10 full-power votes a day will now exhaust the majority of your voting power. Of course, if one does not wish to use this much voting power in a single vote, anyone is still free to lower the power-percentage of their votes accordingly.
The changes to the impact of a 100% vote are more material. A 100% vote will be 4 times more powerful once HF19 is completed. As it stands now a single 100% vote uses only 0.5% of your remaining voting power (voting power regenerates fully over a 5 day period). That means real users would need to vote 40 times a day at full power to use all of their voting power. This leaves users who are less active unable to fully leverage their voting power. After this change, a single 100% vote will use 2% of your remaining voting power, meaning that 10 full-power votes a day will now exhaust the majority of your voting power. Of course, if one does not wish to use this much voting power in a single vote, anyone is still free to lower the power-percentage of their votes accordingly.
I think the thought behind this is awesome. Minnows aren't curating a lot so they are missing out on curation rewards. Let's lower the number of votes needed a day to curate effectively. That's awesome... but I don't thinka it's gonna do what they thinka it's gonna do.
Right now curation is dominated by a handful of posts with huge rewards. It's often the same people making the same huge rewards. It seems like the big guys are all helping out the same people and so those posts get huge. It turns out that's not only good for the author, but it also helps maximize curation gains for the whales. (Don't hate the big authors hate the game)
Right now whales have to distribute those big votes over 40 posts. HF 19 they can distribute them just over 10. Instead of a whale dropping a max of say $50 on one post now it's going to be closer to $200... you know what's that's going to do to post values? TO THE MOON!!!! but only for like 10-20 posts a day.
Remember when we talked about only doing 1 major change at a time?
As a scientist I know not to mix more than one variable in an experiment at a time. Voting and linear rewards should have been separated. It'll be hard to isolate what is causing what if you haven't read this post yet. I fully believe this plan was implemented to help minnows. I think the fanfare over linear rewards dwarfed attention to this second component, which I actually think will have drastically more impact on voting rewards distribution and be extremely negative towards equitable distribution of reward pool funds.
Terrified and calm
So, here's what I think is going to happen. You're going to see your rewards drop like crazy unless you're a top poster. People will abandon the platform and the price of steem will drop. Maybe a few other witnesses will understand what just happened and go along with some of my proposed fixes below. There will be manual adjustments through flagging again that will be seen as unfair that actually help the other 138,980 users on the platform. Then there's a relatively quick fix.
After that fix we see an increase in steem price and people come back. It also brings awareness to how better distribution of the out going rewards pool is important to this place, and we overcompensate in that direction. I suspect a roller coaster. I also think people here have good intentions and it'll be fixed.
What to do?
- Don't mix more than one big variable at a time.
- Go the opposite direction with vote count. Give people more votes (80-100) so it's hard to keep only supporting the top 20 authors every day and you have to dig for more people. Support steemit.com based curation strategies that are fast to implement for new users so they can curate too (ie 1 click implementation of following the Minnow Support Project's curation trail). It ends up looking like a curation mutual fund :)
- Make vote power loss dependent on the relationship of SP of the voter to the author. If they have the same SP it costs normal. If you're voting on a minnow with much less SP it should cost a whale much less of their voting pool to upvote their content. That changes the incentive to upvote minnows.
- Double flagging efforts until its resolved.
BTFD
Should be an easy fix. So, buy the dip. This is also all theoretical because there are way too many programmed variables and human interactions to predict what we see in reality.
I've altered my witness to HF 19 to verify my hypothesis. I think the blowback in a month will help minnows. Hold onto your hats.
In other news
My witness campaign is going great. I'm at Witness 51 after 2 weeks. I witness ~20 blocks per day. About 250 people have upvoted my witness.
My witness central project is going great. The Minnow Support Project has 300+ people in the Discord channel from multiple countries helping one another out with votes, resteems, follows, and writing suggestions.
I'm connecting with multiple countries that could use centralized support to growth hack in depressed economies. They need steem so they can have a dependable deflationary currency. Should be fun.
This is not an economic analysis. It's just fear, uncertainty, and doubt. I appreciate the concern, but that is the extent of the analysis here.
The number of rshares cast on a daily basis after HF19 goes live will be higher. But the reward pool will be the same. The concern is that the rshares will be concentrated. But there's no basis to support this assumption.
The number of rshares cast by a single account will still be regulated by the off-chain influence cap like it is now (by the whale truce). The only way to cast more rshares will be to spread votes over more posts (just like now).
The net effect is more posts will get more votes. And since the daily reward pool will remain unchanged, this will just pull down rewards from the higher earners and spread it out to the lower earners.
I hope you are correct in that there will be more of a distribution of the total rewards pool across the whole of Steemit and not more concentration of a small percentage.
I tend to agree. I'm pretty sure HF19 will bring more equality.
The main focus should be to make the platform seem more lucrative for new users in order to adopt more members. So the focus of the whales should be to increase the wealth distribution down, in order to have higher volume coming in.
This means less paid for votes at the top, but more votes.
The problem would be how to justify this, as this basically would mean whales would have to redistribute a small allocation of their gold mine. Why would they do that? For the community to grow? Things are sweet as they are.
But this is needed for the community to grow. Not many people would take the hassle to join on upvote-bot program in order to earn 1 buck per post. Its only computer dudes like you and me, who already joined this betaversion.
There need to be a just balance or we'll all end up losing.
I believe you are correct in some perspective.
That is not accurate.
First, if you were losing 0.5% for each vote at full power, after 40 votes you would lose only 20%, not "all your voting power".
Second, after each vote at full power, you lose only 0.5% of your current voting power. So, after 40 votes at full power, your voting power is 99.5%40, that is 81.83%.
I am voting more than 40 times a day at full power and my voting power has never been less than 30%.
What is true is that if your voting power is 80%, after 24 hours of not voting at all you will get back a voting power of 100%.
After HF19, starting at 100% voting power, voting 10 times at full power, your voting power will be down to 81.71%.
Going from 80% to 100%, with no voting at all, will still take 24 hours.
That section is a direct quote from the steemitblog post. Take it up with them :)
@steemitblog is not God. They obviously made a mistake here.
It is obvious to me, and it should be obvious to you, that starting from 100%, losing 0.5% forty times cannot result in 0%, but at 80%.
I agree. @steemitblog didn't express themselves correctly. We know what they meant but what they meant isn't what they wrote.
you are correct. and only slightly modify the description and they can be right too.
Thanks for putting your points across in this post they are interesting to hear. It's very hard to know what exactly will happen but I really hope it helps newbies more as that's what will really grow the numbers here!
Thanks for the analysis, this is interesting. I like all of the suggestions you've presented. I think giving more votes rather than less will allow for curators to look for more content (or whale authors will just create more content that can voted on amongst peers). And making it so less vote power is used on minnows to encourage votes is good too.
What about increasing the effect a vote has on a minnow if it comes from a whale? Further incentivizing curators to look for good content from the lesser knowns, and giving them a better chance to be seen.
That's why I want less voting power used when voting on a minnow. I think it's similar to increasing rewards when the SP spread is large.
What if you did both? It would be a boon for minnows. Your suggestion gives more votes for the whales (a good thing for them) and mine gives a better chance to be seen for the minnows (good for them).
Whales have more opportunity to go find good content to curate, minnows get the juice they need when a whale backs them :) win/win
I think it'd be awesome. They should still run them one at a time tho.
Oh for sure, agree with you on that. Thanks for all the hard work you're putting towards the minnow population
This is an excellent point and would greatly increase the incentive to vote for minnows. Let's be honest, the future of Steemit being able to scale relies on the minnows, and lots of them. If Steemit is to become what we all know and hope it can be, something needs to be in place to promote whales and dolphins alike to search for good content to curate in the minnow pool.
Ah finally a post that actually makes me understand the upcoming hardfork. Seems like a good attempt and while I am quite active now I cannot allways be, like many people I think. Then it is nice you can just in a few minutes do your curation.
This really activated my almonds. I think this would be an effective adjustment. Good write up.
Also, concur on not mixing more than one major variable at a time. Easier to assess changes, UNLESS a solid argument could be made that the efficacy of the two changes are interrelated/dependent on each other for an optimal outcome hypothesis.
Activated my almonds LOL
For some reason, only thought of whale balls and miley cyrus
Looks delicious.
That is funny.
I'm going to re-read this several times as it's a lot for a minnow to take in one bite, I may have more questions as I work my way down through it again but:
"Right now when calculating your actual reward the backbone takes your amount of reward shares and squares it."
So right now, my 0.01 reward share is actually 0.0001?
and
" In the new update it will take your Reward Shares unaltered."
So my 0.01 reward share will actually be 0.01!!!!!!!!!!!!
HOLY FUCK THAT'S AWESOME!!!
Resteemed and upvoted (back down to 72% voting power)
It's something like that. Reward share isn't exactly SP though so it's more complicated.
It's more like your RS of 2 = 4.
Their reward share of 10,000 = 100,000,000.
Now it will be 2, 10,000. Which is fair.
So the linear reward share system sound good to us minnows, but frankly, if the RS is still not decouple with the difference between SPs, a whale's vote will probably make minnows getting practically nothing.
I think to help minnows, there should be some way to boost them up based on their comments' quality.
Well... maybe for next HF.
I get it, but my background was 20+ years watching GM self destruct from inside.
I'm not even at a $2 RS yet, I'd be peeing myself with $75 or $100 posts.
I'm not some starry eyed fresh college grad dreaming of that corner office and $500k salary and supercars.
But unless there's an infinite supply of former Facebook or Reddit users with 4,000 followers coming here you need a constant infusion of fresh blood to keep adding value and and develop into dependable content creators.
It's hard to keep talented people when their measly 0.01 turns into 0.0001 for the 1st couple of months.
Or am I just completely missing something?
Honest question, I'm not trying to be a dick.
Oh, I agree with all four of your "what to do" suggestions.
Crap.
Perhaps a UI change can counter some of the negative effects of the new 10 x 100% vote (if your predictions come true).
For instance, the upvote arrow could be split into multiple buttons for 25/50/100% power.
Kinda messy, but I might actually prefer that over the 3 actions I currently need to do for a custom vote strength.
Relative to now those buttons represent 100, 200, 400 post HF 19. I think that's bad news bears.
love the princess bride nod' thanks for trying to break that down my friend really appreciate it
Sure thing. Time will tell!
I thought HF 19 was supposed to fix things not make them worse! Besides, I don't even know what a Hard Fork is, let alone why they keep making sequels. I mean, you'd think they would've stopped at number four, but no, they just had to keep going. It's Wrong Turn 7 all over again.
TL;DR: You should probably not bother reading the rest.
Anyway, on a slightly more serious note, even though I don't fully understand what's going on I can see some problems ahead with all of this. The changes trying to address the problems that many people are concerned about don't seem substantial enough to make any real difference. It seems to all be based on the requirement that human beings are capable of being completely impartial (and perhaps omniscient) regarding who they wish to reward for posting.
But as I said before I don't really understand any of this, all of my ideas are coming from a place of complete ignorance, and if anyone would like to explain it to me in something even lower than layman's terms I'd be happy for the information.
Also, I'd like to state for the record that I can't see how any of this is really going to have any sort of substantial impact on me. I'm more of a bottom feeder than a minnow right now so I should be able to survive.
Oh, and apologies for the wall of text, I probably wrote enough here to fill a post of my own, haha.
Good times. yeah, in the end it won't really effect you. Just makes the climb harder and longer.
Well it's not like I have anything better to do. And, hey, you never know, I might just get super lucky someday.
"Just makes the climb harder and longer", that seems like quite an effect if you're the one trying to climb.
You are rapidly becoming one of my favorite steemians... You should join our discord: https://discord.gg/RRDzn6c
Aw, thank you. I don't really know what discord is except that gamers use it for chat. I'll check it out in a bit, but I'm really more comfortable in an environment like this, much less pressure, haha.
It's a very low pressure zone but I definitely can relate.
I'll have a look at it in a few minutes, once I'm done eating.
Some really good points here... I was thinking a better formula than either would be if you multiplied the sp a post gets by the number of votes it receives to determine the share of the pool... For instance, if a post gets 3 100% votes from whales with 1 million SP it would be equal to 3 million votes from minnows with 1 SP. That would significantly help bridge the divide between whales and minnows and probably build a healthy middle, dolphin class which is probably where most people should be after a little while of quality posts
Stuff like that gets complicated by bots. Idk.
Too true...
¡Wadda hell! get rid of all those damn bots once and for all. Ban them all ¡dammit!
¿Would we wish to create a living community here or not?
Yeeh yeeh yeeh, Steem & SBD is not born nor grows in trees, much less these reproduce out of thin air. But come on! ¿Is gonna be this a rewarding Social Network with true literate human interaction, with people who actually writes, reads, mines Steem creating content, upvote consciously live and in real time, resteem ppl crap with intention and purpose? With ppl willing to actually comment and engage within the community way beyond madcap curation gain and rewards only or further encouraging the emergence of extra and eventual more jerk circles with HighSP?
Yeah! of course, I admit it. I'm clearly a complete ignorant about the economic & financial intricacies of this all. But in some way, I am already kind of sick and done with bots also.
¿Could any next Hard Fork implementation improve and enhance the actual social aspect of the platform without affect too much the health of the Steem/SP/SBD cryptocurrency existence and the creation of greater wealth under other different mechanisms and parameters not necessarily automated by some sort of AI intervention?
If it's so, I am all ears!!
Can't kill bots. It's impossible wtihout a giant crypto buero like the DMV in every city.
Thanks for sharing your review of HF 19 @aggroed - it certainly looks like it will cause only a minor fix to the problem of reward distribution. But I agree we can only alter one variable at a time and this is a step in the right direction.
The minnow support project is definitely proceeding very smoothly - there are many happy campers in the Discord channel everyday and we all appreciate your hard work and dedication to this project!
Thanks boss! Glad to have you with us!
You're very welcome @aggroed. If you ever need any help with the minnow support project or any other initiatives, you can count on me good sir!
This is a very thorough and well organized analysis. It helps to have the major details distilled to their essentials. As a new comer to the platform it helps a lot. Thanks!
anyways man, don't lose motivation and be encouraged everything will come at his own time, as i say keep smiling and work hard, PEACE
I'd be happy to see a 6% whale ball shaving after every HF @aggroed! Incisive analysis here with comedy too! Loved the article - UV/RS! :)
This post received a 31% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @aggroed! For more information, click here!
Did you just say we are going back to the old way of limiting the number of posts that can get 100% rewards?
Good post thanks for sharing I Re-steemed, I found this to be very helpful thanks again 👍
Thanks for summarizing. Beats sifting through GitHub :)
Hey @aggroed you talk about this as I see it from my point of view and mentioned my worries I don't mind giving this a go but hope it gets fixed if it doesn't work out. I actually really enjoy curating and like upping posts and boasting it up by $0.06 I wish I could do more but I am only a small minnow that needs votes.
glad I am in for the long haul .... it is going to take me forever to understand this stuff....
:-|
resteemed ,upvoted
namaste
This was my exact concern about 10 votes / day.
There will be no incentive to vote outside the usual circle.
Let's hope blocktrades pick up their original voting pattern at least.
Rewards are gonna get pretty lonely for 99% of the authors.
I guess this is the result of the discussion and misunderstanding of how this will work. This aspect, like you said above, is the best change. Give a little bit more value to the minnows. THanks for the clearification and breakdown.
Great work you done for Steemit to grow more.I give you my vote.
good votes you,,, i lek
Good points. Great insight as always. I enjoy picking on this ridiculous whale system here but most of my favorites are whales. There just simply aren't enough whales here to upvote all the newbies. I doubt many minnows will be willing to post for several months and see only some spare change while less quality posts receive huge rewards. It is not envy or jealousy, it is self-preservation and common sense. As it stands now minnows have to pray they are seen by a whale, buy votes or kiss whale butt. I'd rather rant about it. Perhaps a few whales might not feel so butthurt and upvote me once in awhile because my intentions are pure. I truly believe Steemit could be the future of social media. But not like this. No one in their right mind would post great content for six to nine months for just a few pennies a day. Except me of course. I would! I am not driven by money (obviously). 😂
Anyway, I hope HF19 works out. I really do.
yeah, I don't think they're butthurt. I doubt you make it on their radar. Going down to 10 votes will make it worse.
You're probably right. Still, downvotes prove censorship exists here. And its rather childish and cowardly. I think many of us feel lied to by the people who invited us to join. I like the community here. But we were sold on the rewards and no censorship thing. A person must be free to question everything. Especially in what appears to be a rigged system.
By the way, is there a breakdown of how many of each class exists here currently?
Check out https://steemwhales.com/ then you can even enter a users @name (try yours). Great data there.
There is also https://steemd.com/ then enter a users @name (try yours). Again great information is at our fingertips. Steemit really is truly transparent all the information is available.
Thanks a lot! 😊
Really great post @aggroed! I would like to be a whale to make a critcs without any kind of consecuences but..
About the hardfork
Before and after the hardfork steemit is still a game among the whales, minnows play no role within this community more than bear the price of steem with our presence. One does not count but a community of thousands guarantee the profits of that 1%. At best, according to the estimates I have made, the maximum aspirations of a minnow is 0.2 SBD per day ... the sad thing is that for some of us that amount is still worth the daily effort, but that is not the case for the vast majority of users in steemit.
My question is: will the hardfork stimulate the creation of communities and groups within steemit? With the new voting rules and the amount of voting power that we are going to count on from now on, will minnows have to group together to maximize the efficiency of each of our votes? Because according to I understand there will be fewer publications earning money, and the amounts of money they earn will be much larger, but the curation rewards will be basically for whales who voted for that publication. The minnows will receive more percentage by curing publications that do not earn almost money.
Probably as a strategy to attract new users the hardfork may come to work. Articles that make thousands of dollars may return, which will ignite the flame of hope in many people, believing that we will all have that same opportunity. Of course followed by the dose of reality because we know that only a few will receive that magic touch of the whales.
BTFD
Too bad I read this post after having invested my savings (it's 60 dollars my fortune) at this time to acquire steem power. Had to wait for BTFD !.
Best regards,
Will see. No answers. Only speculation.
Nice code image you got there. Wonder where you found it. :-P
Here's the downside to not making these changes together. People always complain about changes. They do it with Facebook and they will certainly do it here when money is involved. If the change is bad, we shouldn't do it. If the change is good, we should do it. When we do it, or if we do it in conjunction with something else, isn't as important unless the combination of changes creates something new which changes whether it's good or bad. From what I understand, the Steemit devs tested these changes out and found the results to be positive. If that's true, what's the point of waiting for another hard fork to change the financials here twice, giving people two opportunities to complain about changes instead of just one?
So is changing to a linear reward good? I think most agree yes. Is it "good enough" for those who want everything to be equal for everyone? No, and nothing ever will be. Equality of opportunity is a noble goal. Equality of outcome is impossible. Also, with that opportunity comes a whole lot of things most people don't see such as the whales who are putting in real money to become whales in the first place which drives the price and value of steem for everyone (I see them every week on my exchange transfers reports). Few people talk about where that money comes from, the effort to create it in the first place, the risk involved to buy steem and power it up, etc, etc. No one campaigns for them. Instead it's assumed they are somehow always being unfair to the little guy. Maybe there's more to it... maybe they power up when others power down. Maybe they work harder providing more value to others? It could be a number of things.
I think reducing the vote power is a really good thing. It's not a whales verses minnows discussion as much as a human voter verses bot voter thing. Those voting with bots can adjust their voting strength down and it will be just like before. But those who actually manually curate and only vote a handful of times a day will see a huge increase in the influence of their vote and that's a really good thing.
IMO, setting up more automated, unattended voting is not the answer for creating more quality here. More people using curation trails could mean less people picking what is valued and what isn't. I'd rather individuals vote based on what individuals value. That, over the long term, leads to more diverse quality. I could be wrong here and maybe curation trails are a good thing, but whenever I've done follow votes before, I've been disappointed with the things "I" ended up voting for. I prefer supporting authors I know consistently produce content I value, and I want to reward them to continue doing so.
Maybe a good way to think about it is this: If you were a whale who worked hard to earn your stake, what level of control do you think others should have on your voting activity and why? I'm all for improving things, but I think one of the main ways the distribution will change around here is when whales sell their Steem and new whales buy it up.
Great comment (?) well it's really a post if you think about it. Maybe it should a post. You have very reasoned thinking.
I didn't mention your gift of that image as I didn't want to associate you with the claims in teh post. For anyone that cares I asked a few for their take and Luke shared the image with me of the exact spot of the code where the changes are noted.
I'm down for experiments. But experiments test 1 variable.
I think a leveled approach is some bot voting, some curation trail following, and some manual curation. Bots aren't inherently bad but can be abused. Manual voting isn't inherently bad but can be abused. Concentrating power of votes when distribution is already at 93% is reckless.
I don't view hard forks as experiments. Ideally, the experimenting comes before the fork with testing and simulations (which I've been let to believe the steemit devs already did). To hard fork on a regular basis just trying things out would not make for a pleasant user experience.
Is that based on evidence or opinion? Yes, a whale could upvote or downvote with more power now than before. That could lead to disproportionally higher payouts for some posts. Or it could not. We have the blockchain data to evaluate the voting patterns of whales and simulate things. If they vote for just a handful of things, their share of influence over the reward distribution is still the same, the difference being all the others who only vote occasionally now have more influence. That, combined wth a linear rewards pool, makes it work. I see the overall desired benefit working when these changes are together and (again) from what I've been led to believe they have been tested together.
If SP concentration in the hands of too few is a bad thing, they we should be campaigning for more people to purchase Steem and power up. That's the best long term solution. Other solutions, IMO, create a disincentive for people to accumulate Steem Power to do with as they please.
This is what we have now. It's going to get worse if votes are concentrated from 40 down to 10.
Might be interesting to map that against whale votes and their voting power at the time.
Clearly a thoughtful analysis, and largely above my level of understanding. But, I'm glad we have folks like you looking into the situation, hypothesizing on possible results, and offering alternatives. Please keep it up!
thanks for sharing. i will vote for you as a witness - since you appear to be thinking in the direction of balance instead of greed. witness the fitness :)
Thanks!
well at least it's one step in the right direction! It can be discouraging for us minnows to spend 5 hours on a post and get 50 cents out of it :( I guess its the luck of the draw because some posts that I didn't put as much effort in to end up getting more than an all day full effort post. I will just push on.
super interesting, thanks for breaking that down like that.
this makes alot of sense and i say more votes would make way more sense.
i am hoping this all works out to help bring some content up front from minnows more often but we will see.
also made my first witness upvote for you as your articles are some the best wrote and alot of useful info keep up the great writing and work.
Thanks!
Can we put this in flashing lights!
Also as you mentioned the number of users in your post I thought I would mention a curious thing I noticed the other day. If you go to Steem Whales and tab through the pages the list of users stops at around 77k. I messaged @heimindanger about this and the reason is that Steemwhales only shows users that have voted or posted once. There may be less users here than we think!
I'm pretty sure there's at least 40k bots. Some users might just be using the wallet service and are legit. But there aren't that many people running around.
I'm a bit worried about exhausting my voting power now. I can't easily change my vote percentage as I pretty much exclusively use my phone. Is there a Windows client I can use yet? My only Linux box is a netbook from 2009.
Thanks for this... I'm glad you're thinking it through and very grateful that you understand the processes and are paying attention. Will be watching to see how it all rolls out but to me you summed it up when you said "I think people here have good intentions and it will be fixed". While I'm obviously new to the game my instinct is exactly that and at the end of the day it will all be good.
Thanks @aggroed Anything to help even the flow of rewards and not just pool the cash with a select few people can only be seen as a good thing.
At some point steemit might need to lower voting power after 50k or cap it if it is going to encourage new members to buy steem, especially when the price of steem is high.
NEED HELP
FINANCIAL CRISES
BREAKS ME
UPVOTE TO HELP
THANKS
Great Post, great info ! We all really appreciate your efforts to improve steemit for the betterment of us all and your efforts to improve the world, people and life itself ! Even as a baby minnow I am interested in all Forks and the consequences. What I really like in all aspects of life is the study of "Unintended Consequences". I believe you delve into this rather nicely. Unfortunately we are left with more questions than answers. Personally, I really appreciate your trying to shed some light on these unknown aspects of the upcoming HF. Thank you again !
Read More, Reason More ... JTS
Just to stay clear... I think it was done with the best of intentions. Not blaming anyone. Not talkin' shit. Just raising a red flag here. Hopefully, I'm wrong.
That was my take on your post ... Sounded like a red Flag warning to everyone, especially to minnows ... Thanks Bro. the more I learn about you, the more I like.
I was thinking the exact same thing about HF 19 which I'm pretty sure goes into effect in 6 days. It's going to be a big surprise to find out that your steemvoter is going to exhaust your votes unless you drop it to ten posters. It's definitely going to move up certain whales and hurt the others that aren't in the top then. The minnows, I think, will be most hurt though. Is this a good thing for the platform? I do hope shares drop for a little while, just so I can buy in at a cheap price again before it all gets sorted out.
Buy the DIP!
You give me 2 cents, I give you 3 cents. Minnowsupport.
The deflationary currency aspect for other countries really intrigues me. In the discord channel, I've talked with many members that are so excited that a couple upvotes from higher power members helps them make more money than they would in a week or more of 9-5 work. Their quality of life is improving just from this platform.
Yep. This place can be YUGE for minnows in general, but even better in say Zimbabwe and Venezuela where I'm going to turn my attention.
Great post, thanks for breaking it down for us.
Congratulations @aggroed!
Your post was mentioned in my hit parade in the following category:
I agree with this but i will also say some people have lots of sock puppet accounts with low sp so the potential issue that arises is that the whales that also have alot of sockpuppets also make alot extra money from upvoting those sock puppets.
I do overall like this though and i believe data analytics can be drawn out to find those who are votong on sockpuppets and just label it what it is...a scam account and put it on an automatic downvote or something.
Havent thought that last part through in particular depth though so ill have to toss it around more.
It would make for an interesting analysis to find out how many sock puppet accounts each whale maintains in their little voting club voting for tall their own sock puppets, ufair really but free enterprise I guess....ingenuity, gaming the system maybe, fair well that's for each of us to decide for ourselves.
Yeah. Bots complicate how to do this best because 1 person with 40k bots can eff up everything for the rest of us.
What ever they do in HF19, if rewards totals go drastically down especially for new accounts....there will be mass exodus. This will be because of the whole instant gratification thing that humans are prone to expecting. If they see rewards go down too much they will think "what is the point in staying".
My other concern is will we suddenly all lose our accumulated rewards like happened at the time the previous HF was implemented?