Voting power of @steembasicincome
@peekbit called my attention to the voting power of @steembasicincome. It’s so low that the maximum payout is limited to about 1.72 $ at the moment. I don’t understand the exact mechanisms behind that but it was not the case before the farreaching changes some months ago. Maybe it’s still the aftermath of this changes.
However, it should be a high priority task to bring back the voting power from @steembasicincome over 90%.
So maybe it could be a solution that either @josephsavage stops all upvotes of @steembasicincome for all post and comments until the voting power of @steembasicincome is back to 100% again or that everybody who is involved and benefit from this project pause all posts until voting power is back at 100%.
The sooner the system is back at its equilibrium the better for us all. Let's discuss it here...
@steembasicincome has posted about this multiple times. The total deliverable value is not limited by low VP - only the maximum value per post is (which only impacts about 10-15 accounts). New delegation orders are submitted on a daily basis, and the price being paid for them is steadily being bid up.
Steem Basic Income already consumes more than 15% of the total delegation available through MinnowBooster's delegation market, and no other delegation market has comparable pricing or SP availability.
The only people that benefit from a high equilibrium VP versus a low equilibrium VP are the top 10-15 subscribers. Everyone else benefits more from a lower VP (because paying for less delegation means higher sustainability multipliers).
Thank you for your fast reply @josephsavage
In https://steemit.com/writers/@steembasicincome/sbi-writers-group I found
„Upvoting Reward multipliers are currently at 1.25x on regular updates and 1.10x on secondary accounts and comments, until our voting power (VP) recovers to 80%.”
And in https://steemit.com/services/@steembasicincome/enhanced-votes-graph-24-april-2019 I found
„Upvoting Reward multipliers are currently at 1.10x until our Voting Power recovers to 80%.”
So I assumed from this, that it is still an aim to let recover the voting power.
And I have ’to go over the books’ to really understand your sentence „Everyone else benefits more from a lower VP (because paying for less delegation means higher sustainability multipliers).”
Maybe you could ad a link to a post here - I’ve obviously missed - where it was already explained.
It is still an aim to let the voting power recover, but we are somewhat at the mercy of market forces.
The missing link you need is explained in this post:
Into the Heart of Sustainability!
To raise VP, we need to bid up the price of leased delegation so that our orders actually fill. Raising the price we pay will mean we need more total STEEM flows to cover the cost of leasing, and the % covered by our current STEEM flows would drop.
Since everyone's upvote value earning rate is affected by the sustainability multiplier, pursuing high VP too aggressively results in lower APR for everyone.
We were making good progress in rebuilding our VP from previous low of 20% all the way up to 35%. Then in the last few days a few high subscription accounts with a deferred pending value increased their posting frequency quite a bit to draw down their deferred balances.
That seems to be over (for now) and we will continue to target 80% VP, but it will take time.
Hi @retinox!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 1.685 which ranks you at #33464 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 43 places in the last three days (old rank 33507).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 212 contributions, your post is ranked at #161.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server