The Curation Rewards Reverse Auction Down From 15 To 1 Minute - Why?steemCreated with Sketch.

in #hf215 years ago

There is one part of the coming EIP that I have seen little discussion about: the reverse-auction period just after a post is published.

Did you know that it is being severely shrunk from the current 15 minutes down to just 1 minute.

Is there any good reason for this?

Does anybody have any coherent idea as to how this has been smuggled into HF21?

You can find it here on Github.

Perhaps I haven't been paying attention, but it hasn't exactly been trumpeted in the recent promotional posts about EIP and HF21.

In my recent analysis of the 50% curation idea I made the error of assuming that the curation algorithm would not be tampered with - I was wrong.

The idea behind the reverse-auction period was to avoid a ton of bots descending on a post within the first second and scrambling to lick up as much curation-rewards as possible. The idea was that most humans would need time to read, reflect and upvote long after the bots had left some curation-reward crumbs. Those automated votes that voted too early would suffer a penalty; that penalty decreased linearly from 0 to 15 minutes. There was a further tweak so that those lost curation-rewards were taken away from the author and given back to the reward-pool.

Now this is all being undone. Has the logic changed? Has behaviour changed?

Those 15-minute periods have been the only interesting game theoretic part of an otherwise naive economic code. Whether by luck or design (I think luck, actually), the reverse-auction period saw two simple algoithms combined to create complex behaviour seen nowhere else on the chain. The curation-rewards-game can be profitable but it is never perfectly predictable and hence achieves a dynamic that could well be useful beyond those 15 minutes. Instead, we see it crushed.

I'm going to (try to) avoid any mathematics, but this will mean that an auto-vote coming in after, say, 2 minutes, will collect its allocation of the 50% curation-pool - without any early-voting penalty. However, the new pseudo-linear rewards curve really hates small votes (apologies to most of you) so that removing the curation-penalty-reverse-auction-period actually boosts our small 2-minute vote.

So where is the logic in this? To take with one hand what appears to have been given with the other?

Or is it to keep the bots running? The new rewards curve plus the reverse-auction could render many small votes too small to make any curation-rewards at all.

I'll let you ponder this...

Sort:  

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

it appears that a lot folks don't really see any value in the reverse auction being 15 minutes. I've come across multiple complaints about reading a post shortly after it has been posted and having to wait to upvote it which usually means no upvote as they forget to return.

It can be rather irritating when it applies to comments.

Who are such folks?

Yes, minor irritants but necessary when a "social" network is infected with bots.
Are bots social? Are friends electric?

People are forgetful, bots are not; there is a command to create a vote after 15 mins - use ($)rewarding (without parentheses).

what in a comment? what does it do? the command that is?

Yeah, I think it should be better known.
Go to steemrewarding.com - details on the homepage before logging in.
It generates a new comment with 100% beneficiary to the author and then sends a vote to it from the commenter. I suspect it means giving steemrewarding permission to do so first, like other apps.

I just made a comment some where else that moment that they are able to pick up the difference between views and reads.. then reward the reads more than the views.. the bot issue will look a lot different.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.16
TRX 0.16
JST 0.030
BTC 58389.55
ETH 2482.59
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.38