Sounds good, for the safety of the account owners funds I'd recommend the minimum to be 4 weeks but I wouldn't be against raising the maximum to more than 13 weeks with this new proposal. Will be interesting to see what others think about giving accounts settling for 6-12 months powerdowns the current max inflation though, I think they'd deem it unfair when they now are receiving max inflation at 13 weeks but it's definitely going to be an interesting discussion.
grabs popcorn
It shouldn't be possible for 13 weeks powerdown stake to earn the same priviliges/inflation as 6 months or 12 months. People should be able to increase their powerdown time though, even after its staked.
Oh yeah, I mean considering now they are already receiving max inflation they are going to be disappointed finding out they'll have to increase their powerdown time to get back to max inflation. Maybe something can be sorted where those with shorter powerdowns give their "missed out" inflation to those with longer so the 13 week one stays as is.
If they added this, it would be a sure way to keep investors away from STEEM.
You effectively increased the powerdown times for everyone across the board since the incentive is moved much further down the line.
If 13 weeks is too long right now and you earn max ROI at that point, by adding this change the 13 week SP would no longer earn max ROI . Some would just leave STEEM because in order to earn the same they would have to lock their SP for longer.
1,2,3,4,5 year powerup would earn more so if youre looking for ROI you pick the highest %ROI option.
This would be a sure way to kill STEEM since there are rarely any crypto investors willing to lock up their funds for so long while shorter powerup times are pointless.
Investors would just stay away even more so.
This is by far the worst idea made in this discussion.
There's also the idea to burn the "missed out" inflation from those with lower powerdowns though, guess it'll all need way more discussions and pros and cons so probably a good thing they are delaying it.
Grab the popcorn!
My primary consideration regarding utility of vesting is security, although that may be dismissed as due to my personal experience, and lack of interest in economic factors. I do not see more than a marginal benefit to security arising from extending the powerdown period. Certainly, I do not see that investing the resources requisite to effecting such changes as reasonable considering the extant market.
I reckon devs have more pressing concerns, as should we all. I agree with others that this post is a necessary reaction to misapprehending investment of nescient parties, and maintaining focus on existing development priorities should continue.
Thanks!