You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Hive Staking Rewards

in #hive5 years ago

First off, I read the whole post and the remarks that were made up to this point. I do not know that they are very important at this time. The last 4 steem forks, and likely more all have tried to fix the reward pool function.When are the suggestions going to come out to fix the WITNESS SELECTION process? Perhaps one of the reason the reward pool has not been able to be fixed is because it steps on to many toes.

I am one of the consumers that nonameslefttouse mentioned in his response. I came to steem for the purpose of consuming content. I post on occasion, but mostly vote and comment and consume. Drop/disallow/remove the self Vote option, for content and for remarks, make it not exist any more. (O-kay now everyone can tell me all about why that won't work, it won't work because of fear on the part about not being able to earn something to make an ROI). I have yet to read a single reason why the self vote is so important, that made any sense to a consumer like myself.

No manual vote and at least one manual comment once a quarter(4 times a year), no right to vote for witnesses. If an investor does not want to look after his/her investment at least on a quarterly basis, they have no right to decide who the witnesses are. Just my opinion.

Fix the witness selection system first then maybe the reward pool issue can be seen in a new light and be fixed by witnesses that were/have been chosen by the actual creators, consumers, and interested investors.

Sort:  

The only argument against removing self votes is that it's completely ineffective. If people are self voting for ROI they'll simply create a second account to vote on the first. I'm in full agreement that we need to tackle governance changes soon. It's especially needed in light of what's occurring presently on Steem, so Hive can point to changes that are more concrete than waiting periods & a temporary reshuffling of stake, and show that Hive is much more resistant to the attack vector that befell Steem.

If people are self voting for ROI they'll simply create a second account to vote on the first.

Make them create the accounts, odds are pretty good they will screw up and lose a key or two. They will have to divide their sake up, with the new curation curve that would mean less over all ROI by having more accounts. That is just an excuse to do nothing about a known problem. It would mean less HP casting a vote, and make it easier for anti-spam gangs to down vote the secondary all the way to tercentenary accounts. It is much easier for a group to down vote 50,000HP than to down vote 1,000,000HP. So why make self voting easy if that is and has been a concern, do away with it, make them make as many accounts as they want/need to get the same ROI as one single vote. Force them to dilute their power.

Most of all we need to Fix the primary cause that got us here, and prevent it from happening again.

I haven't been letting my downvote power sit idle here on Hive, and I've found it much easier to help deal with haejin, a straightforward single account self voter, placing votes high on the curve; than crystalliu, a network of accounts shuffling stake, creating dozens of spam posts and voting at much lower curation curve ROI. Anecdotal evidence, sure. But in both cases vigilant community efforts and the use of downvoting are the only remedy. A code change would be only a minor impediment.

If anything, I would advocate for the removal of self upvotes to occur entirely on the User Interface level. I imagine with Hivemind it would be possible to simply not show a like button when condenser or the PeakD UI sees that the post is created by the logged in account. Any user who is going to set themselves up on an outside auto voting bot or some other solution is already savvy enough to get around a blockchain level restriction. Removing the option from front ends would at least set the social expectation for new users and general public that self voting is frowned on and not a community standard.

They will have to divide their sake up, with the new curation curve that would mean less over all ROI by having more accounts.

That's a misunderstanding. The curve tax is calculated based on the total rewards on a piece of content. Small votes are not punished per se.

Okay thanks, they made it pretty confusing on how to figure things out.