A Day Of Whale Abstinence Will Answer The Question!
If whales abstain for one day, we will understand curation well enough to make the right changes
Fewer Whale Votes Let's Us See What Content Non Whales would be voting for
The same amount of Steem is paid out daily. Without any whale votes, the Dolphins and minnows will allocate Steem. What will the distribution look like (more flat) what type of content will rise to be top ( who knows?)
@razvanelulmarin touched on this here
I discussed it here
(1) What will the Trending Page Look Like in the future !
With whale votes gone, small Steem holders will have large influence on the authoring rewards. I imagine after whale votes are lapped, everyone's vote will be worth 10x as much. We can see what the payout distribution would look like in whale free world. ( I imagine it will be more belly distributed)
(2) Are There any Adjustments we Should Make?
Without whales splashing around we may find some problems that could be easily fixed. It's worth a try.
(3) It Will be a Great Reward for Minnows!
I imagine many minnows will have their highest rewards ever on the day of fasting. This will rewards the little guy who has persisted.
I think it would be an interesting experiment. Maybe one day a week could be whale upvote free for a trial period of seven weeks. There are so many people analyzing the steem data that we can be assured of knowing exactly what the impact is from every possible angle. Going with your theme, I propose Friday midnight to midnight on some chosen time zone as a day that all accounts over a certain amount of SP do not curate.
spot on! very good idea!
I'm writing a post now, suggesting they do a 100 days moratorium on their votes
at least the 100% votes, they could still vote at 1% - 10%, just so they get to play as well, but not at 100% because it skews the results
and you're 100% right; let's do a test ... just 1 day and then we'll know for sure what it would do
What will happen is that the bigger dolphins will have whale-like power (although somewhat less because the big dolphins are more than the whales). So we'll still have the whale effect, but the effect will be present through the biggest dolphins...
In a sense this is how it is happening already because the largest SP-holding account which is of ultra-whale status doesn't curate... and a few very large SP accounts don't curate either - so the few whales at the top who do actively curate get more power.
There is never a power vacuum in a system of fixed reward pool. Someone has to give those rewards out. And those who are idle leave the power to those who are active (always starting at the top).
But
the difference between whales and dolphins is larger than difference between Dolphins and minnows.
the influence is exponential so small differences have big impacts
Dolphins made their way through posting and curating so may like different types of post.
this what the platform will look like in the future
I think (3) is where the main difference will be due to a multifaceted approach to content that is lacking when 5-10 people decide (although I think they are also rewarding things that they are not genuinely interested at - but understand that others do... For example a whale may not be interested in recipes or photography but they may hit a few votes there too - to encourage diverse content for the good of the platform).
Then (2) - more rewards for bloggers, but smaller. As for (4) we'll see :D
I'm confused ... do you think it's a good idea or not?
I don't think much will change to be honest because the old whales that will not be participating will be replaced by the next most powerful users.
Some think that the whales give them the reward. In reality the whale does not hand out 100$ bills. The system does. The whale just tells the system that the reward pool should be allocated to users A, B, C. If the whale is not here, then someone else will have to allocate the reward pool. At that point, the most influential persons will be those who are mini-whales or mega-dolphins, which will be directing how the reward pool will be split. It's not much different really.
I get all that, but the difference would be of course that the votes will come from a whole lot of dolphins, rather than a small group of whales ... which should give better results.
instead 30 people deciding everything, there would be a 1000 people making the decisions ...
A negative result is still a result.
I'm all for the experiment. I see very little possible harm here, other than one day of forfeited curation rewards by whales. We can afford it.
There is also the recharge factor. One day idle = recharging... so whales who sit out get to recharge their voting (if they spent more and earned more, the day(s) before).
super! but the problem is that if you do corroborate and maybe some other, there are still whales who won't..in which case, you will come back too and so on. We need everyone to be on the same page, how can we convince all >500kSP holders?
Everyone keeps talking about fixed reward pool, but go follow masteryoda and get your head on straight. The amount of SBD handed out daily is NOT constant.
That's to be expected because the reward pool is actually coded as a fixed percentage of the new Steem produced. If the value of Steem is lower, the SBDs are lower.
The reward pool is fixed in terms of Steem - however the value of that Steem may fluctuate. If Steem goes 10x, SBD payouts rise 10x.
I believe there are other factors involved in that algorithm. All I know is that there is not a fixed amount of which your vote is a percentage. Your vote will be worth the same amount of SBD (mine is 2 or 3 cents, depending on the day and the post, sometimes it's more if the post already has a decent expected payout) whether the whales vote at full power, or not.
Well, this is a nice theory, and i assume the lack of whale votes accounts for the recent "disturbances in the force" however, my vote is worth the same as it always was, so I'm not sure your theory is playing out. My vote should be worth more if it's based on a set payout divided between all voters and the heavy hitters are removed, correct?
The key variables are Steem price ( which has been falling) and amount of Steem power voted. If we had a whale fasts the Steem power voted could fall by 90 percent. The. Your vote would be about ten x as powerful. It would be interesting for someone to monitor Steem powder voted per day so we could see in real time our relative voting power.
Well, here is what I know. My damn vote is worth the same now as it was before all of this started happening. It changes the expected payout by the same 2 to 3 cents, only now my own votes are down almost 40%, while my followers have grown by 20%. There is nothing wrong with the current system. It was rewarding posts based on merit in the eye of the voter, which is what a truly free market system should do!
What are you basing this on? Look at your vote. The whales primarily abstained, or pulled back voting power yesterday, was your vote worth more? Mine was not.
They are still voting as far as I can tell, why do you think they stopped? I did notice post values going up yesterday so maybe some of them pulled back But I suspect they were still voting. We need to tally up how many whale votes came in yesterday.
I've had a 30% drop in votes over all and my payouts almost instantly went from $30 on the low end to $250, to $.65-$1.34 $2 being the highest in about 48 hours. Something changed.
Interesting. I would love to see some stats, you maybe right though. I guess thinking about it it might take two days. My best post was active for three days because of late votes. I wish I had posted more!
We have stats on how many whale votes, but not on the power they used, except individually, on steemitstats, so you could trace it, from catchawhale, that tells you who was voting, to steemitstats, where you could find the power.
You are asking tooo much :)
One day? Go outside enjoy the fall!
let them power down and celebrate and leave the trending page for us :)
Please No! Without supervision of whales something might go wrong! )
Well maybe they could still downvote if needed.
Interesting idea. I don't understand the voting technicalities well enough to know if it would work. When you make a vote the amount of money it is worth is shown instantly - how would a whale abstaining from voting change that .i.e. how does the system now if whales will be voting that day or not so that it can adjust the values?
The amount of Steem awarded is the same each day. If whales didn't vote, the dollar amount on post would slowly realize that the Numbr of Steem power voted that day would be much lower ( like 5 percent of normal.) as the whale fasts went longer and longer all post would start rising together. Because the prediction algorithm would realize hardly any Steem power was voted that day.
In. Other words when whales vote it actually takes a bit of money from all other post and awards it to the one they voted for. If they didn't vote all post would rise.
OK so it would slowly rise to compensate it obviously can't go back and change what has already been voted for - that is what I was not understanding.
The dollar amount shown on a post as I understand is a prediction of where it will end up. This is why sometimes you vote on a post and the value goes down. If whales abstained predictions wild be way off until the very end of the day.
read my post ;)
This post has been linked to from another place on Steem.
Learn more about linkback bot v0.4. Upvote if you want the bot to continue posting linkbacks for your posts. Flag if otherwise.
Built by @ontofractal
Why is this 5 days late?