Redistribution of Steem Power & Major Systematic Improvement - My Solution

in steem •  2 years ago


The Solution

Option that enables "borrowing" Steem Power to other accounts without losing ownership of it, that only affects up vote weight.

Currently high vested users delegate their posting keys/voting access to other users to curate instead of them, in other words give someone else the "driving rudder". The only negative about this is, they are technically letting someone else decide instead of them, removing the "personal" aspect of the account. People don't wanna share their account, it's something personal and it should stay so. The proposed solution, solves this, giving the high vested users their "driving rudder" back and still letting them share their steem power.

Assuming the current state of power holders stays the same and the user base increases, so that we end up with 10x the amount of posts per day the system would become unsustainable, high steem power holders can't keep up with the current state so a 10x user base is a dream at this point, people would leave the same way they are doing now, so a systematic solution like this one or better is needed.

Information & Rules

  • The Steem Power sender can at any moment "take back" he's steem power from the user without notice. The user can also decline Steem Power send request.
  • The added Steem Power only affects voting power
  • The sent Steem Power is unaccessible until "taken back"
  • Accounts with less than 30 Steem Power and account age of less than a month can't use this feature in order to prevent abuse.
  • The power giver can set the percentage of curation rewards share 0-100% (as a form of tax)
    (The set percentage is the amount of SP that the Power Giver gains from every curation reward the user with given SP gets.)
  • For abuse prevention, witnesses should be able to vote for "borrowed" SP power to be removed from an account to the original giver. This would prevent possible system abuse where one would "merge" two strong accounts into a even stronger one and possibly attempt to abuse the system.

Both the ones who gave and the ones who received Steem Power should have the data publicly visible. Example of where this could be nested is in the drop down menu of Steem Power :

The menu should consist of:

Power Down
Deposit
Manage(This button should be used to manage SP, send/receive "transfers" and set "tax" percentage)
@john 200.000 STEEM 2%(transfer user name | amount | share percentage, light color indicates "given to", dark color indicates "received from")

Other solutions are very welcome, but they must be transparent. Viewing the sent/given SP should be easy accessible and open to public(data who sent it, how much and what curation share percentage).

Possible feature would be, when hovering over one account's SP to show the amount and percentage of "borrowed"/"sent" SP and own SP.

Pro's:

  • More and higher rewards
  • Faster redistribution of power
  • Higher incentive for others to join
  • More fair system
  • Benefits the entire community no matter High/Low SP
  • Active users get vote power
  • Better curation
  • Using inactive accounts power/people who don't have time to be active

Idea like this benefits everyone, high steem power users can spread their voting power sit back and relax while good active users curate and earn rewards for themselves and the high steem power users. Another possible use is, when traveling or being really busy, you can send your SP to a trusted active user/s or friend/s to use it while your away on a trip or are too busy to use the platform.

Personal positive side of this is that, Steem will finally be "less a ponzi", because the early power miners would be able to share their power as well as Dan and Ned themselves, what would result in a significant improvement. In this current system I highly doubt that neither Dan or Ned would give someone else access to their posting keys.

Con's:

  • End of "feature" posts, RHW & Bots(Possible)...
  • With those rules in place I don't see other Con's

TL;DR


I can transfer steem power to you and set percentage of how much of your curation rewards I get if you accept. The received power will be calculated in with your power when you up vote, you can't power down my Steem Power I've sent to you and I can take it back whenever I want.

Feedback highly appreciated, this idea needs more fine-tuning by the community and developers.

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:  

Perfect read for how i'm feeling today. Thank you.

·

Your welcome Paco! :)

" less than 30 Steem Power" You never want to use Steem values as criteria. Inflation could play havok with this. A rep requirement might make more sense.

·

Indeed, thx for feedback. My initial thought was preventing someone powering up numerous new accounts.
Possible solution could be the requirement of: Rank 30+ and again 30 Steem Power +

I'd be curious to see how this is coded. Numerous users have proposed distributing/delegating power, which I find reasonable. But I'd like to see a practical approach to it. In theory it looks nice.

·

Yeah me too, but I have faith in it being good in practice, since this can be seen in a way of "borrowing money", I'll borrow you some money, you'll use it and from every gain you get from using that money I get an agreed percentage.

I do like the idea of a Steem Power loan market, however there are some possible concerns:

  • Loans are generally given for specific time periods, there should not be an option for the lender to take it back at any time. You loan for say 2 weeks, it ends in two weeks and not before. After two weeks you can renew... or not.
  • We shouldn't be building in a policing mechanism for witnesses, it's a market, if both parties agree to a deal, that should be fine. If you need policing, something is wrong with the way incentives are set up.
  • Steem Power is worth more if pooled together, thus such a market is likely to lead to more concentration of SP and not less. Pooling SP together becomes a profitable proposition for both parties after all, splitting SP does not.

Never the less, I still think such a market can be useful:

  • If you want to take a break from Steem, (or even retire from it), you could just lend out your entire SP to someone else, who will then still be making money for you with it.
  • Many smaller SP holders could team up, increasing their total voting power far beyond the sum of their individual voting power.
·
  • Loans in this case don't need to be time specific and they should not bee seen as a "classical loan".
  • Policing mechanism needs to be there to stop users from merging 2 high valued accounts to a even higher one gaining significant influence increase in the platform. Also to prevent in general use of this feature to make bigger single accounts instead of more smaller ones, solving the "pooling".
    Also this is better since only specific accounts have power, pools would allow "abusive" users to use it.
    I like the positive sides you've stated, I'd also like to add
  • High Vested accounts could "power up" smaller yet more active users.
·

Support for lending steempower. Suggested something like this a week ago, though not in such great detail. https://steemit.com/steem-ideas/@mikkolyytinen/pooling-votes

I'd say you could draw your sp back with a 24h/48h penalty of use after withdrawal . Voting rewards from the account would be divided automaticly according to how much you have invested(with 10% of sp in you get 10% of the rewards) and added to the pool until withdrawn.

·
·

I'd say you could draw your sp back with a 24h/48h penalty of use after withdrawal .

I don't see the aim of that penalty, what does it benefit and what not? Could you elaborate why?

Voting rewards from the account would be divided automatically according to how much you have invested(with 10% of sp in you get 10% of the rewards) and added to the pool until withdrawn.

I proposed a "share percentage slider" instead of automatic process, so that users can set their own "tax".

·
·
·

The penalty is there to prevent bouncing the voting power back and forth. Otherwise If i lend you my steempower and you vote, then i'd take it back and i'd have the power at my use again. That would allow manipulation by pumping up posts to create attention, and then redoing it on other post with another loan group. Of course you would lose the curating rewards from that post, but possibly gain author rewards from another. Would it be beneficial, i can't tell.

So problem if i would set tax 100 percent i would get 100% of your rewards. Then it would be close to actual transferring of steempower from rewards. Say i lend you 1000 steempower and you have 10000 of your own. And if i had more and taxed you less, so you could possibly get bigger proportion of steempower as you would normally. By keeping the rewards based on actual share you would not have these irregularities. But would it hurt if they were split differently, again don't know.

·
·
·
·

Ok the first point is definitively good, a penalty should exist. About the tax 100 percent that's up to the user to decide will he accept or not, obviously I wouldn't necessarily accept someone lending me 50.000 SP but taxing me 100% for it, that would mean all curation rewards would go to that person. The ability to set custom "tax" is there in order to be flexible, someone would like to power up a friend by taxing him less so that the SP gain of the friend would be increased.

taxed you less, so you could possibly get bigger proportion of steempower as you would normally.

That is "desired", that can be used to power up good curators.

Potential issues with this are:

  • It makes SP a tradable commodity, which is not in keeping with the design of SP.

  • How do you keep track of the SP so that posts aren't double-voted? It gets complicated.

·

I know it doesn't fit the design of it, but It is very beneficial, we could set a limit on how much of one's SP can be shared to others.

How do you keep track of the SP so that posts aren't double-voted?

Elaborate?

·
·

Say I vote for a post, then lend half of my SP out, and then the borrower votes for the same post. I suppose at the moment of lending, any pending votes could be recalculated. But this gets messy, and could even be a DoS vector.

·
·
·

Oh, I see, a possible solution to that could be that the received SP gets locked after being received for 48 hours and after that period becomes available for use and to withdraw back. This would prevent the double-vote.

·
·
·
·

There is still the second payout period of a month though.