RE: Proposal – Abolish the 50%-50% Rewards Option
It's an interesting proposal, but I am leaning towards no. The amount of liquid rewards that the system is producing is not the main downward pressure on the price. The early adopters that are cashing out dwarf the posting rewards.
Also, the ability to get paid and see it 'work' is likely going to be an important factor in keeping new users interested after visiting the site.
As far as SBD, I think the main goal of it is to have the rewards from the blockchain eventually be able to be used directly in a functioning economy. If they are not given to new users, then it defeats a large part of the reason for having them.
I'm not trying to knock your idea. I do think it is good, and very worthwhile to bring up and consider. Those are just my thoughts on it.
Thank you, for your comment and sharing your thoughts.
As I said there is no one magic solution. Every little piece counts, and we could only modify things that we can.
Without commitment, that would continue to be a problem every time when STEEM has a high price. 13 weeks past after the last hardfork, that means one could power down fully if they want.
This is an important point. It would require 2 weeks after HF17 if the author is successful. More if he is not. Seems fair.
However, alternatively we could keep the SBD rewards liquid.
It seems that is one more reason to keep SBD distributed. You have solid points. That's why I like discussing, and that is why I'm sad when I see no (valuable) comments on posts. It's true that one could power down and exchange for SBD in my proposal, but I've forgot to count in that with SBD, our goal is get it actively used ASAP, as highest volume per they as possible.
After your comment, I have to say keep SBD distributed to users is a better idea, but not STEEM, only SteemPower. They could see in a short time that they can really earn and spend money, the money, that we want they spend.
Tell me, why one should invest in Steem short term? All an investor can see is someone come here, make some dollar and convert half of it to BTC immediately. That either means the user base trust more in BTC or they want to spend their rewards instantly. That means constant dilution of the invested money.
There is no escape, because no one seems to trust in the whole system.
Thanks again for your valuable comment! As you can see, it makes difference. :wink:
If I am understanding correctly, I think this is the idea. If the platform is not sitting at a high debt level, then authors would get paid in 50% SP, 50% SBD. The only way to get liquid STEEM would be to: power down, exchange SBD for STEEM, or convert SBD for STEEM.
Short term? There is not much benefit for that at the moment IMO. For now, really the only reason to invest in STEEM (short term or long term) is the expectation/anticipation/hope that the price will go up. Personally I still feel that is a good bet to be made for the long-term. In the short term, you would be hoping to either buy in at the 'bottom', or betting on there to be some volatility in both the upward/downward direction.
Yes, this is one of the main problems at the moment. There are a lot of 'good' reasons for this, but I actually blame a lot of it on the FUD. When I first joined back in July there were a lot of valid reasons to complain, but there has been a lot of progress since then. Personally I feel pretty confident that if we keep going in the direction we are going, we'll get to where we want to be within the next 3-5 years. Another part of the problem though, is I don't see many people that think that is an acceptable timeline. In a lot of people's minds, if we don't see significant growth within 1-2 years, then it is a 'failure'.
OK, I'm not sure how the SBD distribution works now, so I should be more clear.
I thought we should distribute only newly created SBD to the authors, which I thought is 5% constantly. So not 50% SBD, but 5%. It seems I'm missing something here.
But the whole reason of cutting the power down period was providing an investment option for short term holders, isn't it?
This is because of the debt level. If there was a low amount of SBD in circulation compared to the STEEM market-cap, it would be generating author rewards as 50% SP, 50% SBD.
Partially. To a large extent it was to remove the impression that people were locked in, and make it feel less 'scammy'. For someone who wanted to short-term invest, it would be better to hold it as liquid STEEM. The removal of massive inflation helped with that! Before HF 16, it would have been 'stupid' to hold liquid STEEM. Now there is not much difference between STEEM and SP, so for short-term trading you might as well remain liquid.
Thank you explaining that. I'll re-read this section of the SWP.
Still, I think Steem doesn't benefit giving STEEM as rewards.
You have started me thinking more on this, and I have some dark thoughts. I'm going to drink something tonight, so I may forget bad thoughts and get some further inspiration solving issues. :)