This proposal is related to reducing the powerdown time to 4 weeks.
Im a bit stretched with time but since this is a topic of discussion for the last year or so I decided to give this one my attention. I currently have a number of things on the agenda. Wer working hard to deliver results with the marketing campaign. We are very close to delivering some important things. COVID has been our enemy as well as current disorganization of the Hive "core team".
That is another thing I will be looking to deal with down the line.
Unfortunately, as it stands now the community doesn't know whos working on what and what exactly is being worked on. Because of that I want to mention a few people: @guiltyparties and @crimsonclad whose contributions do not get enough praise when it comes to dealing with Hive outreach. Their attempt at covering themselves, with work done by others, an essential part necessary for an efficient functioning of an organization like Hive, oftentimes is ignored.
Formalizing a core structure based on niche covered by contributors is something that will need to be done down the line.
To the topic at hand
These are the reasons against the powerdown time reduction I have come across:
- Reducing powerdown time will make investors sell their Hive tokens and tank the price.
- True believers in Hive will keep their Hive powered up regardless of price action.
- If powerdown time is reduced hackers „phishing“ can steal a larger portion of your stake in a week than they could if the powerdown time is 13 weeks.
- Hive lacks 2 point authentication.
Most of you have your own opinions on what 4 weeks powerdown means to you and I am sure you will share your opinions. Please do.
But this time, lets move beyond words in comments into action. Hive gives us „tools of Gold“ and as Mene has thought me, Gold isnt that soft at all. 😉
I have talked to one of the large Hive investors and a core team developer and it was made clear to me that adding this change into a future HF would not be too difficult and if the proposal passes the return proposal and the AGAINST proposal in votes, it would be accepted as a change the community/investors want implemented.
I wont name that person because it was not made clear that I should.
I personally also support a 10% Hive redistribution on a instant powerdown and even going down to a 1 week powerdown, but this proposal does not cover that because I feel that kind of change is too big to consider at this time for many. This is simply related to reducing the powerdown time to 4 weeks.
Lets take it one step at a time and make it simple. All other changes can be presented down the line.
DISCLAIMER:
I take no responsibility for any code mishap or any results of this change. So make sure you know what youre voting for. Either FOR or AGAINST.
So please VOTE.
Lets stop talking and start doing. The community has the tools to „move mountains“ and putting the responsibility on others, blaming whales, devs, Ned Scott or the lack of dog memes will get us nowhere.
Because of that, here is Nala, that im making an official Hive maskot. (send protests to my DMs) We might not have Akita Inus or Shiba Inus but we have a Samoyed telling you to Vote! And Samoyeds for sure trump all doges out there.
Vote here FOR the powerdown time reduction:
https://peakd.com/me/proposals/178
Voted in favour of power down reduction
I believe for the long term stability that we absolutely need more than 4 weeks for power down and the current system is just fine.
If I was to get hacked and somebody powered down my account they'd only be able to get less than 10% of my assets.
If this were to go down this would increase the liability for all users cross the platform.
There is only 35% of Hive staked atm. It is clear no one wants to lock their funds for that amount of time.
If you are incapable of managing your account with 3 passwords in place and you get phished, lets just move the powerdown time to 200 weeks, just for you.
That way only 1% of your funds are taken out.
Lets forget that long powerdown time is a deterent for ivnestors and that only a small part of all hive is actually staked in this current state of Hive.
Well how about I return with the who cares about changing it if that is the case and the far majority is unstaked.
So that basically means this initiative really doesn't mean anything. Man just pushes Us in the same Waters that Justin Scum himself was standing.
Well... It is what it is.
I'm standing on staking my own.
This again?
I think @blocktrades said that this could be tossed into the next HF if the for proposal passes.
That's one mixed bucket of chicken, coming up.
Politics, it doesn't matter the platform. Random ass additions are always tossed in.
If I don't get some fucking fries with that, Imma be pissed.
That'll come with hidden cost.
Watery coleslaw?
Lets deal with it.
3 options.
Id prefer either of the last 2.
The people getting 4 weeks are just going to bitch about not getting one week within a year...
Whatever, crypto kids. Do your thing.
People will always bitch about something.
Does that mean we shouldnt try and change anything?
People had over fifty weeks to powerdown, and didn't, because 13 weeks is too long, or some shit. Okay then. That change will make a WORLD of difference. Hive to the moon! ....
Next? The destruction of the base layer? Because thousands of successful high valued community tokens all getting converted to Hive at once then dumped on the market will somehow stop Hive from hitting the store shelves and fix "those problems" too?
Heh.
Just do, whatever.
Nobody here can PROVE in advance a 'change' will change things, for the better.
When people parrot the same lines consistently, for years, without adding much, or finding flaws in their plans; consistently glorifying their solution as the only road to success... it's bunk.
Turning that dial won't change a damn thing.
But seriously, I'm relaxed, and don't care. Just do, whatever. Putting channel 5 on channel 3 doesn't and won't alter the programming.
Lets put it this way...
What has more of a chance to impact our current state?
No change at all or attempts at change?
Standing still is just that. Standing still.
I'm not a fan of stagnation. Not a fan of blaming shit your regular human gives no fucks about being the cause of potential stagnation either.
Let me guess... the world will hear about THIS change, this time? This change won't be like that last time? And when this change occurs, we'll continue to keep it a secret? Then sit around thinking it's our settings that are the problem once the changes go into effect, but nothing changes?
Dude. We met bitching paid votes. Years ago. Kudos to you for trying to get the word out, okay? Those are the results I'm looking forward to seeing. How the fuck do you market something that in six months sounds nothing like what was marketed?
Always fiddling with knobs and twisting dials. At some point there needs to come a time where changes go into effect, then that shit is pushed onto the people in a way that makes them understand. If this is that time, okay, fine. But every change in the past has been kept a secret. People don't even know about the thirteen weeks. They don't even know they can buy a ticket, take the ride, and leave the ride with more than they paid. Never once focused on disposable income, in a world where disposable income pays the bills...
So, whatever. Do you damn thang, crypto kids. All this world knows is tokens. Nothing else.
The wording is confusing. If I vote for this proposal, I WANT the 4 week powerdown? The way it comes across.. is that it's going to happen in HF25 unless we vote the proposal, which I know is not the case.
'VOTE AGAINST the 4 week powerdown time'.. it says.
If this proposal is to reduce the powerdown from 13 to 4 weeks, then it should be ...
'VOTE FOR a 4 week powerdown time'
There are 2 proposals. This one is Against it.
Ah... and I thought you had double-posted!
lol. Nah. You need 2 to make it clear. If you have just one then the other side doesnt really get a say. Simply passing a proposal isnt enough to get a clear judgement.
Having the 2 options go head to head makes it much clearer.
Gotcha, and voted!
The other thing this is just completely arbitral, dualistic, fascists attitude. 4 weeks yes or no? What sort of hostage situation is this?
Its as arbitrary as the 13 weeks were or the 2 years before that.
If you want 1 week make a proposal and ask. If you want 50 weeks do the same.
4 weeks has been made clear as the point most sides are closest to.
Those that want shorter times will be happy with at least 4 weeks and will vote for it.
Those that want to stay at 13 or more will vote against.
Its fairly simple.
Yes, but 13 weeks is just a current, temporary consensus, and I don't say I'm in favor of this particular one.
Again, it's based just on some dualistic bullshit. How about option allowing shortening or lenghtening powerdown period in the real time with the votes of community.
It's unbelievable, that with all possibilities available we are in this political-like shitty discussion...
How about something else. How about 2 weeks. How about 18 weeks? How about rewarding long term holders.
How about how about?
We can go on and on. How about vote for this, vote against this or dont vote. We can go from there.
Going forward just for the sake of moving on is no different than escaping. We are getting dirty in politics here. I don't see any good for the community in this.
The wording of the title is bad IMHO. It implies that if you don't vote, it's getting implemented.
Maybe something like "Keep the current system in place"? Or something better.
Anyway, I don't want to make another change for the current HF. But I wouldn't mind it in another HF with more analytics and reasoning than "I take no responsibility for any code mishap or any results of this change" ;)
hmm. Well youre voting againts the other proposal. I think its clear in the post that the goal is to have it both pass the return proposal and exceed votes of the other proposal.
The only thing I should have maybe added is: "No change is implemented if the witnesses dont vote in the change". I was hoping that was clear to anyone using this chain and voting proposals.
What ive learned is that its a fairly simple change.
Because i dont. What ever you vote and whenever you vote, you are the one taking responsibility for your vote. Not me or anyone else.
Congratulations @lordbutterfly! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Your next target is to reach 6250 replies.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out the last post from @hivebuzz:
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!
I don't know about everybody else, but I think having to wait 13 weeks to be able to fully unstake is absolutely outrageous.
I don't understand why we should carry on enduring such a punishment. @blocktrades, please explain why you are in favor of that.
As a suggestion you could check out nonameslefttouse's comments on this post for some of the reasons for keeping p/d longer....and bill.prag's comment about why blocktrades may be against implementing the change :)
Here comes my proposal:
Just simplify HIVE for a better user experience and remove HIVE POWER entirely.
Just let users hold HIVE to gain those benefits from HIVE POWER and get rid of powerup/powerdown mechanics which does not really serve a real purpose.
If we are really confident in the future for HIVE, there is no need to fear selling pressure. HIVE POWER mechanics only shifts selling pressure a few weeks into the future, thats all.
From my experience with @hiveonboard the current token system is way to complex and overwhelming for average user, which just discovered the HIVE blockchain. Putting the entry barrier much lower and flattening the learning curve, will have a positiv impact on the token price.
Just my few cents.
Voting against it is a terrible idea. Pay attention, defi is a fast moving concept. Compared to that, Hive is already seeming analog. Waiting 13 weeks to have access to YOUR Investment is as ridiculous as it gets, nobody wants to be tied down like that in such a fast paced industry. If it was upto me I'd make Instant power downs possible, at a fee ofc. I'm surprised Hive is not working on taking advantage of #BSC or just defi in general, it would really push the project further. Having the option to stakw your Hive on #BSC cld be a great idea.
The price issue with hive is the infinite supply, ppl will always try to game the system.
13 weeks is way to long, 4 weeks is needed but personal I think 1 week. If people are worried it will tank the price well we need to find investors and other people who don't.
Just my thoughts
Its very hard to get people to lock their funds for 13 weeks. And you dont really have a choice. Its 13 weeks or nothing.
Unfortunately Blocktrades is voting against this which is why most of the witnesses fearing he will unvote their witness wont say a word.
In order to get a clear answer on this the community would have to step up.
Step up 🤣🤣 that's not how hive works tho, The 99% follow the whale sperm.
Well one thing it didn't so was tank steems prices
13 w ... it is good , it helps me think what I do.
Not jup in and out all time.
Currently 12 people against and it's 47%, 41 people for and it's at 14%.
Proving again and again that we're not as 'decentralized' as we think we are. Whales are gonna do whatever the fuck they want and the rest of us I guess just put up or shut up.
Its just Blocktrades and Neoxian that are against it out of the large accounts.
The problem is that the next HF will remove most of the witness votes due to inactivity so the witnesses (that are large accounts) are afraid to lose the Blocktrades vote so they dont want to go against him.
Thats why theyre silent. Even though many are in support of the proposal.
The community needs to step up if they want change. We would need a couple hundred smaller accounts for this to pass.
I like Blocktrades, generally, but I definitely don't agree on squashing the 4 week proposal. If weak hands want to exit - fucking let them!! Let's get them out as soon as we can, the price will recover and - if Steem is any indication - we'll be all the better for not having folks constantly keeping us stuck in the 50c range.
Just my two cents, as a nobody but, that's my opinion.
well here we are voting on time needed to power down stake. and we are voting with stake that needs to be powered down. so i feel people with a lot of stake should be able to have a bigger vote on what will happen with their stake.
is their decision right one no idea.
maybe blocktrades just does not want to add new code to the hard fork that is already in testing so that there is less possibility of something going wrong. because the HF code is already done and on test net. and coding something that is directly connected to our funds probably should not be rushed.
But nothing "happens" to their stake. Keep it powered up if you don't want to power down, it doesn't affect the current stake at all.
I do however agree that injecting anything on an already basically finished HF is silly.
if i remember blocktrades has no strong opinion on powerdown time, so he voting no right away makes me think he does not want to include any new code to this HF. especially something that is connected with stake and funds.
i know they moved resource credits code to after the HF just to not wait a week or two and change the finished code.
If that is the case I could understand for sure! My day job is QA so I definitely have had my fair share of 'lets just push this in last minute' blowing up in my face and pissing me off lol
That's nonsense! Read again this paragraph from above: "I have talked to one of the large Hive investors and a core team developer and it was made clear to me that adding this change into a future HF would not be too difficult and if the proposal passes the return proposal and the AGAINST proposal in votes, it would be accepted as a change the community/investors want implemented".
I understand that if @blocktrades has a lot of stake, his vote should be bigger, but I'm just asking him why he sticks to the 13 unstaking period. That's something of the past, when we all were on St--mit, but things change and most of the community, myself included, is wondering why we should keep carrying this burden. The majority of tribes have taken the 4 weeks approach because it's better for everybody. Why should Hive be different?
I really would like to see the small accounts needed to vote on this proposal to be approved, but unfortunately I don't think this is going to happen.
i don't know is it easy or difficult, but the code for HF is "freezed" two weeks ago and test net is running. and i seen some stupid code misses for hard forks when the chain was down for days. adding additional code would move the HF for more testing or maybe less testing. bug connected with funds is something i would not want to see.
i am not even sure that is the case, i think i read some post or heard in some talks that he has no strong opinion about 13 or 4 weeks powerdown, so this is my guess. and listening to hive development meetings i concluded he is not happy with adding new things after the testing is started. and i can understand that.
Ok, thanks for the info.