RE: Steemit Economic Changes - Now vs. November 16th Fork
Thanks for laying it out like this. I saw the table in the other post too. I was hoping someone would take the time to do that.
It's important to note that SP inflation (interest) is currently 90% of 160% (going off your figures, because I really don't know exactly). You included it above, but I think that gets lost when not put next to each other. This translates to 144% gain in SP (call it inflation or interest, it's still a great hedge and possible advantage).
Many of us invested in SP for this very reason. I picked up a couple of tranches recently and powered them up with this in mind. I'm not complaining, just trying to make sure the numbers are accurately represented and laying it out there in case I'm misunderstanding. I don't claim to understand them all. This has been a pretty amazing exercise in striving to grasp the formulae and the implications/ramifications. I'm a little uneasy while being hopeful at the same time. You invest with the cards on the table. It's unnerving when someone comes and replaces the deck.
IMO, making Steem a viable cryptocurrency will increase its value as much or more than the reduction in SP payout. If Steem can get into the mainstream as a currency, it becomes a game-changer. But the mental gymnastics of assessing this are pretty challenging. In a sense, they're impossible because we can't know what the market will do.
Thanks for that point. I did all the STEEM calculations based on the STEEM now (that I could source) vs. new. What it is now (400), 9.5% of that (38). The 9.5% is from 100% of current amounts. This could throw off the calculations if the current amount 400 is 160%, then 9.5% would be 23.75 of 400, instead of 38 of 400 STEEM. Everything else would also change. I assume the 400 per minute that was posted on a steem.io page months ago represents the default creation amount that is still in place.
I don't have any other numbers to go on as to what is the current rate per minute. That 400 is 100% of what is now, and I understood the change to be 9.5% of what is now, which could be wrong. Sorry everyone if my calculations are off. I was going off of simplistic 100% easy math.
Maybe the 9.5% is of the 160%, but that would also indicate a different per minute creation rate from 400 as it was originally before it was 160%. So since my calculations are made from the 400 figure, assuming that is prior to the assumed 160%, then the calculations still hold true even if the per minute rate is changed to reflect the 160%, all the other calculations would come down to the same amount.
400 / minute at 100% is 640 /minute at 160%. Meaning 9.5% of 400 at 100% = 38, and 9.5% of 640 at 160% = 38. Same thing when weights are applied with the adjusted per minute rate. There is a lack of information for me to confirm. Someone who knows more would have to do that. Sorry. Thanks for bringing up the issue. Peace.
haha, my head hurts. ;)