You know why I know this is true. Right now I could delegate 1 mil HP at 9.5% APY. These people will use that HP to curate and make more than the 9.5%.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
You know why I know this is true. Right now I could delegate 1 mil HP at 9.5% APY. These people will use that HP to curate and make more than the 9.5%.
Doesn't delegating for profit reek of vote selling to you?
I don't see any difference, myself.
I guess it depends on who you delegate to. The people I delegate to all run curation projects where they upvote good content. It does not matter what happens in the background with the HP it matters what people do with it. Now if the people getting the delegation were selling votes, it would be bad. But if they are doing good curation, it is a good thing.
Which brings us to ganging up to increase rewards,...
I haven't seen much out of the curation groups, maybe it has something to do with me being told when I got here that my content was 'too controversial' to ever get a vote from them.
But, the rules as currently proscribed, do leave little else to do with idle hive.
Any thoughts on taking 5% from the dao and 5% from the curator's side of the rewards and giving it to the savings accounts?
Lock hive three days, get whatever
interestinflation adjustment that 10% divides out to be?Unstaked hive does benefit stake holders, authors, and curators.
If we could get the top 70 accounts in on this we would see vote sizes double and maybe more interest in giving them out.
I'm not agaisnt inflation going to the savings account, I can see the merit in less powered up Hive means more rewards for those that are powered up. Also, for those wanting to get out early, but still want to earn something, can with this.
I think by giving idle stake an out, that doesn't include voting that stake, it benefits the stake holder with passive rewards, and the rewards pool with more inflation, but less hp pulling out rewards.
It mitigates the disparities in wealth across the pool.
The n2 worked just fine while the whale experiment held voting to 800mv.
I sure liked watching my vote grow by 4x.
If the interest is high enough I don't see why giving savings account interest wouldn't do the same.
The vote curve that penalizes poorness needs to go, too.
That was bs from the start, but being a stake based chain, it benefited stake holders to take from the poor and give to themselves.
Gotta wonder about them that supported that.
Not all of them are gone.
That curve was sold as abuse mitigation, but if we don't have enough money to pay @themarkymark for all the abuse mitigation he did, then we might as well stop punishing the majority of the people we are trying to attract as users.
Stakeholders clearly don't give a damn about abuse.
It is this fact that causes me to characterize this action based on class consciousness lines.
In order to say that that curve wasn't adopted to punish the poor to the benefit of the popular, then the stake that voted for it should also support Marty, but, as we see, they don't.
There are other examples of abuse that isn't punished because stake doesn't give a damn about them, either.
But, we sure got a curve that punishes the poor to the benefit of the wealthy, huh?
We almost have the rewards tuned for top performance, a few more tweaks and this thing runs on its own.
Maybe then we can look at giving the dao inflation back to the rewards pool.