You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steemit's Hard Fork 17. The Witnesses are Planning a Whale Smorgasbord and Plan to make it Look like generosity!!
I'm new here so I can't say if you're right or wrong.
However I hope the community will flag every bot comments and posts used to make money. Bots and multiple accounts makes no sense in a social network.
What happened to the flattening of the rewards curve and the n2 realignment?
Maybe in HF18? Source: sneak comment.
It might help you a little if you read this - Steemit Suggestions and Rationale - it will give you some context to the way in which the rewards pool is currently distributed which has given 99% of all the rewards pool to less than 4% of steemians. This HF17 set of proposals makes things even worse.
I am sorry if you are new to this - you have arrived at a time of strange behaviours!
All I would say is that thee are a few very greedy people whohold the keys and they have managed to take 93% of the value off the platform through sheer incompetence and greed.
Stick with it, count the steem not the $ and post about what you like. The ways around the system look strange but you will get the hang of it. Please shout out if you ever want any advice on anything! Namaste.
Thank you! Yes I know there's a huge disparity in accounts power, and I like your Steemit Suggestion post (again, I don't know if they're all right suggestion but I agree with the 6 principles).
What I can't tell is if things will be worse with HF17. The scenario your describing will be possible, but will it happen? I don't know how thes whales think and behave. If they will not upvote and spam comments each others, the new reward pool will be better for average users, I think, because writing comments is easier than writing post.
Personally I'm not here to make money, I'm here to read interesting stuff, in a place where no censorship is allowed. So I'm concerned more about the voting system / botnet than Steem price.
HF17 introduces censorship - officially - and 99% of all the rewards ever distributed have gone where?
Censorship?! What on Earth are you talking about?
@ebryans editing is only possible by the authority of the account that authored the comment. Even then, the edits are additional transactions, and don't actually touch the first transaction, which remains in the blockchain forever. How is that censorship?
Hi @sneak, Thanks for your comment
This is what it says in the HF17 : Comments can now be permanently edited.
We are adapting a new model of imposing as few restrictions in consensus code as possible and having witness actively reject transaction for both rate limiting and security. There is a soft freeze of 7 days that will be lifted with a non-consensus operation. This custom operation still needs to implemented, but will be included in 0.17.1. The operation will be a plugin op in the witness plugin that will inform a witness to accept edits for the next T minutes.
How? You make me think I understood nothing about these changes!
According to https://steemd.com/distribution 99% of rewards are distributed by the whales, but I don't know where they're gone. I saw whales voting whales but also whales voting minnows, however I'm new so I have not enough data to express myself. If you same whales are mostly upvoting whales, I believe you.
Thank you @ebryans! Very useful website!
OMG the curation rewards are even worse, 0.1% takes 90% of curations O_o
Now I see why someone wants to eliminate curation rewards.
Posting rewards looks better distributed, but still no minnows in sight:
If you go to here :http://steemwhales.com/
You will find this:
Blue is the top 1% of accounts, red is the second 1% and yellow is the dolphins. Green is the minnows - this chart shows the allocation of rewards by section of the steemit community - have a look at the rewards curve - it is an exponential curve. Out of the top 25 accounts, only 2 paid for their wealth and power
Show us the author rewards pie chart. That's where the rewards has gone to.
The author rewards pie-chart is as follows, @abit:
I think the 0.1% and 1% in the author reward chart are not the same people as in the curation chart or holding chart. Looks like it's misleading.
Thank you for that, @abit and your willingness to engage on important issues with a relative mini-minnow, such as myself.
Looking through the account details it would surprise me if the figures were far wrong. The centralisation of everything is fairly plain.
You might be interested in this:
I don't understand the new chart.
It shows the concentration of ownership of steem by estimated value.
So, on 19th March the platform ownership was held by % and numbers of accounts as follows: 90% by 251 accounts, 85% by 116 accounts, 80% by 64 accounts and 75% by 40 accounts.
Unfortunately, as you can see, the graph is not going in the right direction.
To me, this is an unhealthy position.
I am more than happy to give you more of this type of info - it also might help you understand why I have so much fear for the platform around HF17.
I would also add that a good portion of comments on many posts actually is the original author responding so a significant portion may even go to the author.