You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Bounty 20 Steem: Should we fix SBD?
"This second part of the stability mechanism is what is not working at the moment."
ORLY???
Do you normally ignore facts before posting? Or is this a special case as you have some agenda?
"SBD has no utility"
Except allowing us to cash out from posts without waiting 13 weeks. Just that tiny little utility.
"I see this lock in of value for a period as a huge asset to Steem and a major design strength."
Oh, well, there's your problem. You like market controls and think an asset that forces you to wait 13 weeks isn't screaming from the rooftops how weak it is because it literally needs to FORCE YOU TO HOLD IT.
SBD is going to 0?
For the record I have no agenda other than promoting the growth of Steem.
You are taking him almost completely out of context with the "SBD has no utility" pejorative... Here's the context:
That entirety changes it all up, but you do make a good point about "not needing to power down" which is a 13 week process. If we dispense with SBD and "the peg" to U$D then our 50/50 could be Steem and SP I suppose.
Steem provides this utility. Ie if there is too much SBD in circulation the blockchain pays rewards in SP and STEEM. So that is not a utility of SBD. What SBD provides right now when it trades above $1 is higher rewards. But the intended utility of sbd is non existent when the peg is not working.
Agreed, but I still think that the embedded market control system of SBD issuance is slowly bringing about the "peg" that would show STEEM is a stable and marketable cryptocurrency. The ballooning supply of SBD is bringing down prices faster than any other moves and as explained by your boi @lexicomical, this is simply from the higher post rewards. Looks to me that the system is working rather well. I'd just be interested to find out if this is by original design or a result of HF19 or a prior hardfork.
@knircky