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
Ill try and keep this as short as possible since this topic has been discussed numerous times. Why powerdown time reduction:
- In a bull run people dont want to lock away their funds for 13 weeks.
- If your Hive funds arent staked then youre subject to inflation which means you lose by holding liquid in the long run.
- Flexibility of 4 weeks powerdown allows Hive hardcore supporters to „play the market“ and reinvest back into Hive. Something I know I do and others as well.
- DEFI has shown us that long term staking times mean almost nothing for the token market cap.
- Investors are more likely to lock funds for a shorter amount of time to take advantage of the curation ROI
- We should not base our decisions on fear of investors selling but rather on the potential Hive offers.
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 against the powerdown time reduction:
https://peakd.com/me/proposals/179
Well, I hate having to talk about this over and over again and explain to people why this is a truly stupid idea and would potentially result in Hive losing it's main reason to exist, decentralization.
Take a look at similar chains like BTS or EOS, where governance participation is super easy.
What is the result of it?
The lower the powerdown time is, the more likely Exchanges WILL powerup and WILL participate in governance.
And then, eventually you're looking at 2 chinese owned exchanges with over 50% governance possibilities and are wondering where things went wrong.
Strong no from me.
Thus, the only way to avoid this would be a 4 weeks + 10% burn, as such, not making it worthwhile for exchanges to opt for that.
No, 4 weeks, vs 13 weeks would make very little difference when it comes to exchanges powering up while governance participation is set at 30 days.
They would want to be blockproducers. Meaning that it makes absolutely no difference if the powerdown time is 4 weeks. You would still need to block their governance participation via consensus once they power up.
We all saw that 13 weeks of powerdown meant very little when Binance and Huobi powered up. Even now they could potentially power up and spam vote themselves with the customer funds, leech the reward pool.
Right now youre trusting them not to.
The situation that would come with 4 weeks powerdown changes very little and people keeping their funds on exchanges is a choice theyre making with potential governance connotations.
Making a claim that 4 weeks is somehow more dangerous than 13 weeks is an absolutely absurd statement. It literally changes nothing when it comes to the faults of DPOS.
The only argument the against crowd is actually wanting to make, but is scared to:
Thats the ground you guys are standing on because everything else is nonsense.
This changed my mind. I was for a shorter powerdown until I read this comment.
This changed my mind. I was for a shorter powerdown until I read this comment.
Boom! Another very VALID POINT where these things need to be talked about first before jumping in.
So far it seems 4 weeks and 10% burn for early power down seems to be a very reasonable change. Most likely a little more complicated of a change that might not make it into this HF and have to wait till the next which I'm fine with.
We've already discussed a few different ways to circumvent this "fear" in MatterMost.
There's the burn idea. Then, there's the decline voting rights in exchange for higher staking %.
You want to give people incentives to hold HP in their own accounts. This can be better staking ROI/interest rates (no, not this voting/curating garbage which always lead to abuse and disagreements on L1). If not, more and more will end up on exchanges.
What went wrong? EOS is miles ahead of Hive in terms of market cap and price with everything you fear the most. And people seem to love BSC.
At the end of the day, what matters is profitbility without interpersonal conflict, not your anarchist/idealist dream.
Hate to break this to you, but Hive is already dominated by an exchange. A pretty non-significant one at that.
There are other ones currently being talked about and in the works such as
keeping 13 weeks but having a option for immediate powerdown with a 10% fee
or
4 weeks and having the option for an immediate powerdown with 10% fee
These sound a bit more promising.
My optimal vote would be keep 13 weeks and introduce the instant powerdown option of 10% fee
Regardless, it needs to be faster with a speed up option.
Unfortunately, I highly doubt the burning mech will come.
Could either be burned or divided up 5% DAO 5% to those holding Hive.
Incentives holding more Hive to gain more.
I'm fully supportive of anything like that.
We need better staking incentives on layer 1. This content thing needs to move to layer 2.
Who cares how much money the so-called whales are making or entrenched in governance when normal folks can actually earn without all the reward disagreement drama?
It was bloody dumb to force everyone to be a content creator and curator on the base layer in the first place.
The multilayer concept is new, it was a purpose built blockchain for blogging.
Behind times that is.
It amazes me that Larimer popped smoke to work on EOS, rather than trying to make STEEM an airdrop on top of EOS. Now we are trying to build multi-functionality onto a purpose-built blockchain.
Are we actually trying to create value, or are were trying to preserve/extract existing value? What does evidence suggest?
My hope is that in case 4 weeks are accepted that the core dev team would add something like this on top of that change.
But this is a start.
Sure, I agree. The problem here is that there are plenty of solutions always in the works and always discussed here, there and nowhere.
4 weeks is simple, clean and a first step. Once we make that first step we can start tweaking it further.
If we become stuck in discussion of 10% instant powerdowns with a burn, or a token redistribution, or a 2 week with 15% or a 5 week with 50%, or whatever, nothing will be done and we will be stuck in a perpetual discussion with no one taking a leap and actually doing something.
Lets do this and talk about everything else afterwards.
I'd be more in favor of a 1-2 week power down time. That's what's needed to prevent double voting on content with the same stake.
Apart from that, there are two concerns motivating the lower power down time:
Whatever economic benefits allegedly derive from the longer power down time (I guess slower powering down and selling) are likely offset at least to a large degree, and possibly more than 100%, by reduced buying and powering up.
I would propose 1-2 weeks, leaning toward 1 week, or even 5 days.
That's even better!
I would as well. My concern is that the distance between 13 weeks and 1-2 weeks is so much larger then with 4 weeks that people will generally be turned off by that idea due to the gravity of change.
4 weeks being already imbedded mostly in the mind of the community and a natural first step. Hopefully if a change is implemented it could be improved on by the devs with the ideas Theycallmedan and others have presented.
I was never really convinced by this argument. If we deem the chain safe then the danger comes mostly from phishing attempts. If Hive, in comparison to other blockchains is deemed "safe" regardless of the powerdown time (and lets not forget our multiple passwords), why do we think reducing the powerdown time would adversely affect safety comparatively to other chains?
The only aspect in favor of the safety argument being the daily usage of your account. But that then as well falls on personal responsibility.
Convincing the community to vote for 4 instead of 1 week seems much easier at this time. Seeing how it goes, with the 4 week reduction being a reality, going further down would be a much realistic discussion.
It is mostly phishing attacks but also potentially web vulnerabilities. Our user base is exposing their keys to the web a lot more than many others, which increases both risks. In fact some cryptos that previously used web for wallets a lot have moved away from it.
5 days is perfect, if someone wants to power down, they will do it anyway.
Time to dump Hive?
I say no to radical moves dictated by temporary emotional market sentiments! More in the post soon.
Which temporary market sentiment? Browse the chain a bit. This has been talked about since launch.
Making extravagant statements on radical moves does not constitute anything that resembles a coherent argument.
It's easy to look for the scapegoats and try to fix what is not broken when all the market goes up and your pick is sort of stagnating. 13 weeks with 10-14% APR is a good offer, and long stacking period is a big asset of this blockchain, it provides stability and shows engagement of users.
What is a real problem is the fact we are cimpeting in the fairy centralized environment. All the chains run by companies are taking advantage of old fashioned inside cooperation, we still need to figure out.
Selling on our values, instead of figuring new ways of cooperating in the fully decentralized environmwnt is a big mistake and will lead to the end of this place.
It's funny to see weak hands in the bull market.
No. Thats all nonsense honestly what youve written down. The powerdown time should be reduced even lower imo, to take advantage of market sentiment right now as well as future market sentiment in a bear market. 4 weeks is just something i feel most can stomach.
No its not. Its just numbers youre stating and assigning a conclusion to based on absolutely nothing.
Again. Its just statements youre making with 0 argumentation.
I dont care what you think the real problem is. I dont care what anyone else thinks what the real problem is.
Theres a lot of problems on Hive... I could name you a dozen you have absolutely no clue about.
But here, im talking about this single thing. Powerdown time reduction.
Lets stick to 1 thing at a time.
We can talk about what someone else thinks the problem is, or what someone else thinks a bigger problem than this is all day long.
Yeah, it's just opinion. With the same level of validity as power-down proposal based on opinions as well. Please, don't pretend anybody has any clue about what's actually going on. What I'm pointing out is: this move is just like a wild animal (butterfly?) fighting in the net.
APR was compared to animals similar to Hive with stackable coin, this is all you can SUSTAINABLY get.
And about longer staking period: now investors and everybody are god damn sure, a big portion of the coins will not be dumped in the next months. Is it really necessary to iterate?
I didn't expect this level of hostility, it just proves my point IMO.
Um no.
It's been talked to death in various places that 13-week is bad. People don't want to lock up their funds for that long for some 10-14% APR (which doesn't exist unless you front run "curators", btw, which also defeats the entire PoB concept to begin with). For a DEPRECIATING token.
The hostility towards you is well-deserved because you clearly have no idea what's been discussed among various people on this chain.
Power down time is one of many problems this chain has allowed to go by for so long.
I'm perfectly aware of this discussion, and yes, there is discussion, which I'm just taking part in right now and again. And I believe what comes good with 13weeks power-down is being overlooked. And, please, correct me if I'm wrong, second layer solution for shortening power-down is being developed, isn't it?
If this is hostility-deserving situation In your opinion I just feel sorry for you.
And what is that good? People don't want to spend money to buy HIVE partially because of it. Why would you lock your money down for something depreciating? This isn't ETH 2.0 where the coin is actually valuable.
If you have no clue what it is, then what is fairytale you are spewing? Please, enlighten us about this "second layer" solution for a very layer 1 problem?
You should feel sorry for yourself for coming into a discussion ill-prepared.
You should probably not pull out the word "hostility" when youre the one calling this proposal "fascistic" on the other post.
K?
Your name reeks irony.
hmmm your dog says please vote.
It 100x better than my proposal because I don't have a dog(e) :D
Sorry, can't get behind this one!
Then vote against. There are two proposals.
I'll check it out, thanks!
I have a question of my own... who are we the most interested in owning and having the benefits of Hive tokens. Do the speculative shiba-inu safemoon buying pump and dump owners provide us with more benefit than long term harm? Do they even know there is a 13 week powerdown? I mean honestly do those speculative buyers really even put their money into most coins they buy? (Some do of course but what is the real expected impact)
Will these types ever truly be fully happy with anything other than immediate or less than a week staking? Are we dangling a fish that would actually do anything significant towards our real goals. Is 4 weeks in 1 week segments ever enough to hit those pumps. Maybe it helps with month long trends but will it be enough for those searching for those crazy day long movements?
Obviously more owners is good specially if they come and stay and find a home for their content and time and not just their money. A large quantity of owners diversifying the ownership of the hive tokens provides the benefit of decentralization... which should lead to 1. decentralized price impact but also 2. decentralized governance.
They need 30 days to be a part in governance. But a powerdown which is shorter than the actual time it takes to have governance impact?
Also I'm wondering who you're trying to throw under the bus when you say: "current disorganization of the Hive "core team"."
Stakeholders. Stakeholders of all shapes and sizes who have all criticized the long lockup period at one time or another.
The 30-day delay on governance voting was meant as a protection against instant massive power-ups that could put network security at risk via centralized control. It really had nothing to do with economics.
There's no reason to assume that a shorter unstaking period should or would have any impact on the governance/security side. PoS chains with better staking incentives and shorter unstaking times isn't some novel concept. Plenty of them exist, like Cosmos, Tezos, Near, Waves, Lisk, THORchain...even EOS and Cardano. I think the longest lockup for any of those is only a few weeks.
Long unstaking time is one of the most complained about aspects of the tokenomics of this chain and it's one of the least addressed. It was changed in December of 2016 and hasn't been revisited. It's long overdue. (As are several other changes that we need.)
Appreciate sharing your thoughts on the questions.
Short term speculators provide MASSIVE long term value for us. It is speculators speculating on exchanges that the Hive price in most part depends on. I mean ask @smooth how much value short term speculators provided to the DHF by doubling the daily budget.
Long term investors accumulate. Short term speculators provide us a payout.
I dont care honestly. The question is if us, the long term investors will be happy with it.
Yeah, i can agree with that.
Lets make it a day longer.
No one. There actually is no formalized core team which is a problem. There is a dissipation of responsibility which is why there actually isnt anyone you can throw under the bus.
The truth is that you NEED to be able to throw someone under the bus for a organization to function efficiently.
Does Peakd have someone to throw under the bus? Splinterlands? Ofc they do. Because it has a organizational structure where you know whos supposed to do what. Hive, the base chain doesnt have that right now.
Appreciate sharing your thoughts on the questions.
How dare you propose an actual thing with two very clear choices?!
Raaaraaaraaaa ,etc etc.
I vote yes :O)
That's only if everything else stays the same. But development and future investment continue to build, presumably leading to an increasing token price.
Regarding the proposal, I'm not going to vote either proposal. I would like to see a system where the longer you power up the more your vote is worth, and the more inflation rewards you get. Not sure how easy or hard this would be to implement. But it has been received positively when it's been raised in the past.
If short-term investors give that much of a dam about DeFi among other things, then, I’d rather see Hive Savings being used and it having an APR for Hive.
It already has a short withdrawal period.
Exchanges could use and offer it for those who prefer to keep funds on an exchange.
Other tokens within our ecosystem could choose to follow by offering APR on their coins in a “saving style account like Hive.”
HBD already offers “DeFi” in the Hive saving account. Hive is not being consistent with it not being included as well.
When people think of savings accounts they already think of earning APR as is standard in many financial services like banking.
Short-term speculators are just that short term. Governance, proposals, or being a curator tend to be more long-term speculators. These two mindsets have different opportunity costs in mind.
Short-term speculators don’t want 4 weeks, or 1 week. They want it as quick as possible. Crypto moves fast.
Short term speculators provide a lot of value to long term investors.
Long term investors accumulate, short term speculators provide us a payout. Liquidity, etc.
Shorter powerup time benefits literally everyone. If it was possible to push this down lower or offer a dynamic powerup time id be all for it. 4 weeks is just a first step. Otherwise we stand in place and talk about options endlessly.
First its 4 weeks
Then it’s a burn
Then it’s 1 week
Than it’s 1 hour
Just do all the bullshit in Hive savings and be done with it already.
They will never be happy till they can instantly sell at every 1% change in the market chasing profits but still expect some kind of gains for holding it for an hour as their “opportunity cost.” Which case they want to keep funds on an exchange to avoid fees and avoid having to wait for depo or risk wallets going “offline” to deposit during high volatile moments. Which is fair as Hive wallets on exchanges are always having issues.
Short term speculators are crack heads. Nothing else. They don’t care who or what gets them their next fix.
If the market really gave any kind of fucks about honest DEFI. Things like Cub would not be at $1.735 going down daily.