Reduced Inflation Proposal

in steem •  3 months ago 

This proposal is to burn approximately $1,000 SBD per day by sending it to the special @null account. Anything that is sent to @null is removed from the Steem supply, as the network protocol ensures that it always has balances of 0, and it has no owner.

If this proposal is ever above the return proposal, it is a choice by stakeholders to reduce inflation rather than allow the DAO to save money which will eventually be released into the market as inflation.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I think a better proposal would mirror @burnpost in trading the SBD for STEEM if the price of SBD is $1+, and burning the resulting STEEM, and either burning or converting (via blockchain convert function) the SBD if the SBD price is <$1 (some additional nuance is needed for dealing with the haircut rule, which I haven't gotten into here).

These could be two different proposals (one to trade-and-burn and one to burn or convert-and-burn) but that requires stakeholders to be constantly adjusting proposal votes in response to market prices to accomplish the same maximally-beneficial effect, which is probably worse.

Burning SBD when it is worth more than $1 is actually harmful to Steem stakeholders so I wouldn't support this proposal as-is.

It might be a good idea later on.
At this stage I want to see how proposals work out.
I also don't want to waste resources in a furnace while massive dumping is going on.

SBD is debt, we're not burning resources but debt. It's only in the unusual case when SBD is above $1 that we are losing out by burning SBD.

Posted using Partiko Android

This post has been included in the latest edition of The Steem News - a compilation of the key news stories on the Steem blockchain.

I keep get a "something went wrong" error. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong to turn this into a proposal?

My first thought is "would it not be better to slow down the printing of SBD?" instead of burning SBD.

I guess I am still in the dark about the reason behind this proposal. Can you provide more info about the WHY? And who would burn the SBD?

My first thought is "would it not be better to slow down the printing of SBD?" instead of burning SBD.

Literally the same thing in this case. SBD in the hands of the DAO has effectively not been printed yet because it has not been released into the market.

I guess I am still in the dark about the reason behind this proposal. Can you provide more info about the WHY?

If you can think of a reason to slow down the printing of SBD, then that same reason applies to this.

And who would burn the SBD?

Transferring to @null is burning SBD. It would happen automatically with this proposal. At least once I can get it to not give me an error in posting...

Thanks for taking the time to write up some additional information. I appreciate it! Hope you are able to get your proposal posted soon.

1000 is a lot!!
That's like saying we don't want the steem proposal system.
Well technically it's like saying we don't want half of it. Because right now looks like 2000sbd are being added each day.
How come you went with 1000sbd instead of 2000 or just 1 million like the refund?

I wanted the proposal to burn a significant amount without necessarily being overwhelming.

If people want to burn more, can easily make another proposal as well as this one. I didn't want to go with a huge number that could very quickly eliminate the DAO funds, because if this was pushed up above the return policy maliciously (for example because someone lowered the return policy in order to facilitate something else, and then this was pushed up in response, temporarily having a false kind of consensus), that any damage it would do would be limited by the time it was up.

The idea is to somewhat reduce Steem inflation when it is desirable, not to eliminate DAO funds entirely, asap.

Another way to do this would be to have multiple smaller proposals (say 100 SBD each, or perhaps an assortment of sizes like physical coins: 100,100,100,100,500,etc.). As many as desired could be voted up and the rest voted down.

We should have more than half a million SBD in a year, so I guess this proposal is good to burn some SBD "quickly". But I also agree with @smooth that multiple proposals with different amounts would be good.

We should somehow burn steem too to reduce inflation to under 2%