You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: An Open Letter To @elipowell
I'd be pretty pissed off if I'd spent 2 years working for and buying + powering up steem only to have a bunch of random accounts jump past me like that.
Then there's the fact that there would definitely be many that just sell their earnings and use steem as a faucet, pushing the price of steem down even further, especially if they're not adding value to the platform in my eyes. And in my eyes, the only things that add real value to the platform are development and onboarding/retention.
Proof of stake, not proof of receiving freebies.
how do you know that you will not get that delegation?
for retention you need to give something to new accounts, and i must say the distribution kinda sucks for small acc. and you see that in an simple example. i was in first 200 in distributing to acc with less than 55 reputation. i am sorry to say, i can't really distribute a lot :D
The distribution does suck but I feel that handing out free delegations for no specific reason in a proof of stake system defeats the whole point. People won't be motivated to buy steem and will be motivated to sell if they get a delegation.
And new users will expect delegations when they join and get frustrated when they don't get one which ultimately leads to them leaving cause they weren't chosen.
It would be easy to design an algorithm to withdraw delegations from folks that simply sold off their rewards. Also, delegations aren't gifts. The delegates wouldn't have more Steem than someone that owned their SP, they'd just be able to curate with it.
If you don't find creation of content and curation to add value to the platform, you don't grasp the network effect. Ultimately, it is that content that draws eyeballs that creates a market for Steem, and without creation and curation Steem would have no more value than rare pepes traded by nerds. It is the market, comprised of users, that creates value.
Would it not be fairer to give everyone 5k SP delegation and take it away from people that start powering down then?
So, create alts. Votes with delegated account. Cash out via alts?
Plenty of dolphins+ have many accounts already set up.
Were anyone interested in restraining profiteering, algorithms detecting circle jerks aren't too difficult to design. If there was any interest in undertaking to distribute stake via delegations from Stinc, it would be trivial to detect the extraction of rewards resulting from delegates curation.
The platform is presently afflicted with profiteers, because the ninjaminers were not experienced investors, but clever devs, and the code extant is the shortest route to profit. Experienced investors seek capital gains, and it is obvious that capital gains are not availed by deployed code.
Profiteers running the show have no interest in detecting profiteering, so such algorithms have not been employed. This does not mean they could not be.
How would that affect curation trails?
I don't think it will, since I don't think these delegations will ensue.
Exactly. However, powering down would be unlikely, as the rewards from curating, self-voting, and etc. aren't necessarily SP. Since delegations aren't gifts of Steem, powering down would not enable delegates to sell their delegations. In order to profit from them financially, they would need to keep them powered up.
It would be trivial to use an algorithm to detect profiteering by delegates and trigger withdrawal of delegations. Delegations that remained in effect would be those that were curating such that stake was being distributed to users meriting it. Merit would be impossible to ascertain with an algorithm, and that's why delegating stake to users is necessary.