POWERING DOWN = LOSING STAKE! WHY NOT ALREADY?!
Forgive my yelling, but that's mandatory, @ned! The message should be clear, you are in IT or you're not. No more double dipping and abuse. Also, if you powerdown you don't receive "interest".
But would you do that? You're one who powered down too, would you sacrifice your influence for money? Or money for influence?
This should happen fast though..the time is running out.
- I'd say curators need to be delegated. As I talked about here. Some people are jsut better than others at curation. I read 100+ posts/day for example but I can only help so much, you read one and can take it to heaven. With delegation we could decentralize the power even further even though delegation itself is centralized.
Make it happen, steemit hq! We're counting you!
Consider the case of an author who has been a successful part of this platform for a year or more. All that time accumulating SP. Do you think it is unreasonable at some point for such an author to say "I have enough of a concentrated investment in this system by now, I do not need more" and start powering down? That does NOT mean being "out". Should such an author (who is not only be a major participant and contributor of "work" but also a major investor) be stripped of influence and told that their input is not wanted simply because they don't want their stake to grow forever? I don't think so.
this. At the end of the day, if the system cannot endure a reasonable level of powerdown without the price tanking, then it simply doesn't work.
I think it is balanced when they have the option to power down a % of stake as was also suggested.
Perhaps a good compromise to this is the interest SP generates?
When whales are powering down, which I do understand is necessary, they have their voting rights, but the 90% of newly mined SP is distributed amongst those who are not. Would give increased rate of SP gain to those who are not powering down and present a solution as a result
Powering down a percentage of stake does not mathematically change the cost of the exit fee. This is an illusion. Whether you power down 100% of your stake for a month or 10% of your stake for 10 months, it works out exactly the same. A penalty equivalent to one year of influence and rewards is charged for any stake that is powered down under this proposal.
I'm not saying strip of ALL influence, but a higher percentage and no "interest" beyond curation/authorship could be a middle ground.
That being said, the solution is not targeting these type of low impact players...
I think it's a good idea to recognize that the longer a person powers down, the less of a stake they would have unless they are active on the site. And if you're active enough on the site to counter the loss of stake every week from the power down, you are "in it." But people have real world financial needs as well, and we can't all be guaranteed consistently high SBD rewards... some can, it seems... but that's another conversation :D
i see that's a convo no one is ready to have yet...
This is the most important point i wrote about it few days ago.
https://steemit.com/steem/@snowflake/there-is-a-big-flaw-in-steemit
Obviously the whales are not gonna like it but it is necessary to prevent the value going to nothing. As a whale said above they have no incentive to not power down, so Ned give it to them!
Seconded! First thing I noticed after joining, that for the system to work, the power needs to be spread between the users, which is currently not the case. Any model that does that is generally a good thing.
I'm not for "giving" everyoe who has a lot of SP worked for it one way or another. I know I did.
I don't want to be given anything, i just want a system that encourages my work and rewards my commitment while not throwing in my face how others do much better with less everything. That's what discourages a lot of new users, a concentrated number of users getting most HUGE votes.
A decentralization of those votes will bring a wave of hope, encouragement and change.
And for that, I am ALL IN.
I am not for "giving" either, and all SP that I have I earned (some of it "given" for services rendered), it is the spread lf the culture of "giving" as SP for whatever reason, in at least part of the payment should be encouraged. I mean you already receive the post reward partially that way. Sometimes SBD are better, but at others SP is.