Bad feeling about HF 19
Hey Steemit,
Yes I'm getting an increasingly bad feeling about HF 19 as I think about it more and more.
Tell me Steemit. Under the new system, why shouldn't I just make 1 post and 9 smart comments a day and vote them up myself and call it quits? My votes are powerful, it would be so much easier just to vote up my own things and then be done with it.
You know, Dan and Ned aren't idiots, they didn't just randomly come up with this N^2 willy nilly. They did it for a reason. It's game theory, with the N^2 power curve, there is a synergising affect of multi accounts voting on the same post, with an affect greater then single votes alone, and this is just as true with whale votes as any other.
Under N^2, my motivation for voting on other people's posts is to create good will and hope that people would return the favor and pile on to my posts too, creating that nice n^2 on my post to pump it up high.
Piling on a post is a good thing guys, not a bad thing! We love it when people group together and create a magical effect that doesn't happen with individuals.
Well under plain old N voting, that magic is gone..so I may as well just vote on my own stuff right? I mean, yea I'll probably still try to vote on other peoples posts..because I'm trying to make Steemit a better place but now the System itself will be whispering in my ear "Neoxian, just vote on your own stuff...it's easier right?"
If we wanted to limit the effects of the largest whales, there are smarter ways to go about it. Why not just do something like this:
- No account shall effect a post by more then X percent of the reward pool. With X being some number like..1% maybe. This X number could even just be a witness setting, so we wouldn't have to hard fork every time we wanted to change it.
Since I have your attention, why not make the number of votes per day another Witness setting too? As a Witness I wouldn't mind having lots of dials and numbers to set.
(image from the internet)
I don't mind if my witness console looks like this....
From the minnow perspective I think it has to become viable to earn from a post without being found by a whale .
Simply because of huge numbers: with the huge growth of the platform and hence overload of new content the job to find good content is impossible to be done by the small number of whales.
So if new contributors get in a situation where hundreds of votes by new members don't move the needle in earnings or visibility it will lead to disengagement.
That will stop growth dead in its tracks and will devalue your account in the long run.
In the end I think you as a whale are in the position of an affiliate marketer: give up some percentage of the pie in order to grow the pie exponentially.
Will you lose money in the short run? Maybe, but its not in your interest either if the perception persists or is started that only whales are raking in the money!
This is a nice sounding comment that didn't really address specific points in my post. Congrats on getting voted so high though. You know, I did offer an idea in my post to limit whale power.
On the other hand I don't believe that a system where your vote to yourself gives you high value is healthy for the community in the long run. The whole concept of producing content in this platform and in every social platform is to give useful, valuable content to the world and earn your place there, not to post and upvote by yourself. Even if I am not fully aware of how the system works and will work after the fork, as @neoxian presented the current working state and with the facts that I read, in my opinion he gave a really good preview of what will happen and we must considered the consequences.
Started to think things through after reading @Aggroed's post: https://steemit.com/hf19/@aggroed/shaved-whale-balls-and-mega-circle-jerks-the-economics-of-hf-19-a-witness-update
starting to see what @neoxian meant with the cockpit idea.
The argument seems to be that although now a fraction goes to minnows, there will be a risk of even more money concentration by the top earners,
with a net effect of slim to no earnings for all the rest. Replied to @neoxian's reply with more explanation.
ohh well I do see some none greedy users here but at the same time there are equal amount of greed, so how you described it... seems like we are in for a ride coming Tuesday.
I dobt actually know the hard fork and havent read whats actually about to happen. But if what you are saying is correct, then its a good thing cos no one man should be able to lead the world into death.
I will vote @neoxian as a witness because you help me to earn my very first dollar here in steemit. Cheers
Thanks!
Except all of this is with the assumption of equal vested accounts. Not a reality.
Interesting.
Low SP accounts. Surely self-voting would not be a successful strategy in growing a stake, which would still, I hope, require integration and acceptance.
High SP accounts. For the old accounts, is it too much to hope that these would have some conception of the importance of the longterm health of the platform and its economy, and not wish to jeapardise their social standing? And for any new whale planning to game the system, they would run the risk of yet another hardfork, and or a collapse in the price.
So for the mid-range accounts. I guess your fears have some grounding, but given how quickly these hardforks come around, burning social reputation by nakedly upvoting a pile of one's own comments would seem to be short-sited beyond belief. But could a new user invest say $1000 and mine the reward pool as you suggest? What are the numbers?
HF 18 gives me no reason to be optimistic about hardforks in general. The $2+ STEEM is no different from the surge in other ALTS, can not be attributed to HF 18. Flagrant abuses seem to have been a part of the platform from the start, will this increase them? Of course I hope you are wrong, but I guess it will be more important than ever to keep eyes open.
I might have to revise my optimism. I've already starting to notice comments on posts, mine and others, saying something like "great post, yada yada", and then the user upvoting their own comment but not the post. Very strange.
I might have misunderstood this completely then. Doesn't the change affect just the value of each individual vote and not the way votes work together on the same post? I though one was changing and the other was staying the same.
Am I getting this wrong?
Yes, you are getting it wrong. There will no longer be any synergy between multiple people voting on the same thing.
That's quite unfortunate. Thanks for clearing that up and setting me straight then. You are the first one I see that has mentioned that consequence and now I feel a bit stupid for echoing the positive sentiment that might turn out to be baseless optimism.
We'll see how people will end up behaving, but the counterproductive incentives are definitely there.
I would have to agree with your perspective on this, @neoxian. It sounds like they are planning to play down whales voting influence immensely. Your wonderful idea of individuals influencing a maximum % of a pool sounds like a MUCH better idea than what they are to implement.
New follower here. Keep up the good work.
Best Regards,
@abn
HF 17, HF 18, HF 19, I am still poor!
You are waiting for HF Rich .
He would like it to H the F up
lol
No matter what this is a hell of a ride!
Yeah FOR REAL 😂 seems like many people are just dumping their whole savings into here 🤞🏽