RE: Not every perceived solution in code is exclusively a solution... sometimes they introduce new problems
I have to say, I am still in favor of changing the code in 2 ways:
- No more selfupvoting
- No more delegation
These are 2 separate points. And let me start of by saying why I want to change the code. I do not blame people who hide their taxes for our unfair world, I blame people who made income tax common practice.
Also I have no illusion that changing the code leads to people not being able to upvote themselves. If they really want to, they will find a way. But right now it is a basic functions so new users (and some older users) don't feel guilty for using it.
My main goal is to cancel out the argument "It is a function in the code, so it is OK to use it".
And let me ask you one thing: Isn't this similar to the mask ban for antifa? My train of thought is,"what does self-voting do as a positive?" You can't push your own comments and posts for further visibility
"What are the negatives?" People start using all their voting power for themselves.
To me the positive is almost none-existent and the negativ threatens to destroy Steem.
Why I do not want delegation (even tho I like what @neoxian and @twinner are doing with the system) is a whole topic on its own, but my thoughts are similar.
That didn't exist the first half of the time I was on steemit. I believe they added that a lot for being able to develop steem apps. So we would need to consider the ramifications of how it might impact that with such a decision, though I don't know how app makers are using it so I can't really say at the moment.
I heard delegation prevents payout periods of more than 7 days. I heavily dislike that everything I and others write becomes worthless (in a monetary way) after 7 days and even if I see the upsides of delegation, I think the downsides outweigh.
Delegation existed before the 7 day payout thing was implemented so I don't think it has anything to do with that. When we first started it was a 24 hour payout, then for quite a few months we had a 24 hour payout followed by a 30 day payout. Not much was happening with the 30 day payout. Then they moved to the 7 day payout based upon a rolling average of the value of steem.
So we did have a second 30 day payout and it wasn't doing much. If they spread it out over longer periods that would change the algorithm and where funds would go quite a bit. It actually could make your payout worse.
So I don't actually see delegation having anything to do with this since it existed before the 7 day payout change if I remember correctly.
The delegation was made primarily to make supporting of different apps possible if I remember. It was more about being able to program a lot more types of things that can interface with the blockchain.
@felixxx told me that if payout periods where to change, delegation would be a problem, because you could let multiple account vote with the same SP by delegating it after it payed out.
The downside of Steemit that old posts are not votable and further it makes little sense to sort old posts on your profile page (topic based homeage instead of boring timeline).
I would really like to change that, but if it would ruin the code, I guess I will postpone this topic ( until I understand those parts of the code :)
Perhaps there is a way to game delegation that is opened by extending beyond 7 days. I haven't looked into exploits of that type.
just to elaborate, because I did not get the exploit myself when @felixxx told me about it:
You vote for someone (potentially yourself on another acc). Then you delegate the power you voted with to another (one of yours) accounts. That takes 7 days to be effective. Now you can effectively vote twice on the same post with the same power.
I like delegation, but I would love to see posts getting valued even after the 7 day period. @steemads might be a solution, but for me it is not completely satisfying because I do not like adds :D
The voting after 7 days won't amount to much. Like I said we did have a second payout for 30 days and it was barely being taken advantage of. The main payout was in 24 hours then and virtually all voting was in that time frame and very little in the 30 day period. They went to 7 days to try to spread this out and give more opportunity than the 24 hours. So they did try longer periods and it didn't seem to do much.
Frankly speaking this is statistical non-sense, like when they "teached" us at college that a class between 22 and 27 students makes no significant difference in the learning experience and therefore class size does not matter.
Remind me to go further into detail but its really late right now
Also yes thanks for the delegation response. That indeed would be a problem.