You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Falling STEEM/SBD Price - Proposed Solution to the SBD Debt to Marketcap Ratio Problem

in #steem-price • 8 years ago (edited)

So you are the one who always want to end the discussion and I am wrong ookkaayy
Also worth mentionning that everytime you have to do some research prior to answering. And you twice said I really don't have any interest in getting in a 'debate' with you yet you are still here debating...but I am the one with misunderstandings... Ill let everyone be the judge

Btw you can't sell VESTs on the market lol

8 years ago in #steem-price by
$0.00
    Reply 3
    Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     8 years ago  

    Hey. I know this discussion is a little old, but I wanted to correct a mistake that I made when we were discussing.

    You had said:

    This is very unlikely because when the price goes down the rewards on the platform goes down and so people are not going to buy more steem if they see that rewards are shrinking

    Then I replied:

    but the rewards pool is based off the market-cap which is the price times the amount of STEEM (not just the price).

    I was wrong. (Sorry.) I now found out that the rewards pool is just a static amount of STEEM, that does not depend on the price.

    Back when payments were made in SBD, the SBD that you got paid in did factor in the price (since it needed to take the current reward pool and figure out how much SBD it was 'worth'), but with the current algorithm where it just pays in STEEM, you are 100% correct.

    I did say when we first started that it was never really about which way was 'better' than the other. I saw value in reducing the inflation as you were proposing, and even agreed that yours might be better than what we had.. My main argument was that the cost of changing was very high too, so just a side-by-side comparison of which was 'better' could not be used as an argument - because it also needed to factor in that additional cost.

    I will say that I'm kind of surprised, but it looks like the "higher ups" agreed that making a change like this was worth the risk. So congratulations - it looks like you won :)

    [-]
     8 years ago  

    I have always been interested in answering your questions and trying to help you better understand the current system, as well as challenging my own understanding and looking for things that I might have overlooked or have wrong.

    I would think that the fact I want to double check my facts and understanding before I respond would be considered a good thing :) I care that I am not providing you with misinformation, and when you say something that directly contradicts what I am saying, ar leads me to doubt that my understanding is correct - I want to try and understand what I am talking about as much as possible before I give you a response.

    When you start saying that what I am telling you is wrong after I have done my research and am confident that I am right, then it starts to cross the line between trying to both help each other understand and better figure out how things work, into more of an argument.

    Anyway, I'm not mad or anything like that. I'm just saying that I don't want to keep going back and forth to try and win an argument. I'm sure we will continue to chat again. Take care.

    $0.00
      Reply
      [-]
       8 years ago  

      I will add one thing though, which you are welcome to continue to 'discuss' with me if you disagree, but the rewards pool is based off the market-cap which is the price times the amount of STEEM (not just the price). The price can still go down while the rewards continue to go up, if the price declines at a slower pace than the rate of increasing amount of STEEM.

      $0.00
        Reply