I ended up here from our chat in the other post. The KE RATIO looks like a great metric, but I might make a suggestion for improvement. This is not in the interest of self-improvement or making my own number be better (we have talked previously about how I spent HIVE to go buy a really expensive new lens, for example) - the output of which will be posted on HIVE , anyway.
Perhaps there should be a time weighted variable to the equation that enables a decay of a certain percentage of the rewards over the years, but still arrives at an "acceptable" amount of HIVE power remaining. IE, people who have been around longer are more likely to have benefitted from higher rewards in the past, meaning that when they've "extracted", they've waited for the higher end of the market to come around, as opposed to the loop that many do of post-> power down -> out (or, in my mind, worse yet (post -> 100% liquid -> out )
A proposal for instance would be
(AUTHOR REWARDS + CURATION REWARDS) / CURRENT HP (KE RATIO as it is today)
KE-RATIO * (Some Decimal number per "years" of service.
Beyond a line of that person's holdings, this could show the change in their stake over time.
Or yet, perhaps we just render a line of holdings over time vs current holding, then calculate the average delta over that period.
I don't know, I'm rambling now :D
When I first introduced it, now nearly 7 months back, people said KE =1 is ideal. Meaning you currently hold the same amount of rewards you were given. However, after a lot of thought both slobberchops and I decided on 3.0 cut off. That gives a lot of leeway. Means it is okay to take out 3X of what you are given.
I hope a 3X factor might satisfy the years of service you are mentioning.