RE: Exploratory Analysis – Account Creation and HF20 Changes
This is some pretty solid analysis, I have to say. In particular, classifying accounts by the type of activity that they have been engaged in since creation over the last two years is a solid way to present them.
It would be nice if we could get an animated gif of the distribution of new accounts on a per week basis over the last year, though not having access to Power BI, I'm not sure how much work it would be to generate those 52 pie charts and save them off as individual files, but I do know that having those files in hand, making an animation would be extremely easy.
Is it also worth considering how many new users we are equipped to handle? Are we ready to just open the flood gates? Or, should we keep it at a trickle, so we grow some awesome dolphins and orcas, improving the base users and current distribution first?
I find that an interesting question, especially coupled with the fact that under HF 20, new account creation will largely be accompanied with a currency burn. Should the number of accounts per week exceed in cost the weekly return from the reward pool, that would provide an inexorable upward force countering the inexorable downward force of reward pool inflation. If anything, that might result in the overall value of STEEM as a commodity to go up because it would be literally becoming rarer in the repository.
From a game theoretic point of view, this is interesting because it provides a counterforce and reason to make a decision to increase the cost of creating a new account at the very same time as it simultaneously increases the value of getting more users signed up to the platform. There is a dynamic balance to be struck but we don't and can't know beforehand what that balance is or should be, so it's reasonable for witnesses to have different ideas about what that balance is or should be.
Expect to see more conflict between witnesses, not necessarily expressed as a conflict over this issue specifically – but there are significant issues over which disagreement can and will happen.
I'll bring the popcorn.
I was hoping popcorn would be needed on this post, but it seems like the witnesses are not going to have the discussion here.
There is a lot to think about with regards to these changes and I do hope a lot of the discussion happen here on the block and not in private.
No, no. All those discussions are definitely going to be held as far from the blockchain as they can, not least because they want to have a deniable form of communication with its own private logs, because a lot of the stuff it's going to be kicked around is going to be just a little bit ugly. It has to be.
Some things are going to be said which are not going to be as flattering to the populace on the blockchain as said group would like to hear.
Some of it, here and there, but may leak out into some other discussions that we are privy to seeing – but they would have to be monumentally stupid to hash the stuff out in public. Monumentally.
They are just not that dumb, thankfully.
Myself, I'm having a bit of popcorn waiting to see if HF 20 actually sees airtime by the end of the month or gets pushed off into October.