Could we vote for more than 30 witnesses please?
An idea that came to my mind some days ago.
With the increase of projects offering third-party apps for Steemit I'm nearly at the limit of my witnesses votes. In fact, 4 are left right now.
Two facts make me question the current number of witness votes:
- More and more projects are being created having their own witness server. I think this increase of witness servers, of dedication to Steemit, needs support. One year ago everybody addressed the need for more 3rd party apps. We have a good bunch of 3rd party apps now but there's also still no limit yet. We should give those projects all support they need.
- There's the top 20 witnesses. HF20 has not changed the names in this list actually. We need a certain stable basis in the witness system too. This is why users like me cannot draw all our votes from the top 50 witnesses to support the (smaller) project related witnesses. Like in any IT system we need the experienced personnel also.
That's why I'd like to vote rather 40 than 30 witnesses. I'd feel more free in my decisions.
Thanks for reading and resteeming this article to get the idea discussed widely.
Sorry if this entry is spam to the witness-category. I will change the tags if it is.
Edit: @portalmine has written down his own thoughts (in German language). I'm including the link for the sake of completeness.
Actually it would be smarter to have even less witness votes. You should not be able to vote for >= 17 witnesses (that's how many are required for a Hard Fork) If it got changed to that, it would be a lot harder to control the top 20 as a single entity.
That point from the person who made me and others rethink my witness votes.
Must be irony.
A lesser number than 30 has the disadvantage that there would be less consent in the users' witness votes (taking the current pool of active witnesses).
I'm free to choose only 15 or 20 now too. And I assume most users did not vote more than 15 witnesses anyway.
Even for an non-nerd guy like me, that sounds fully feasible.
fact is that only top20 are really relevant. So 30 votes is already more than you need...
3rd party apps should run NODES, not witnesses, as nodes are more scarce and needed more. And you should only vote for witnesses that also run a full seed p2p node.
Maybe for the decisions. Not for the actual block-signing if I understand the records correctly.
We already had the question how dezentralised the current top20 really are.
You're questioning the reason(s) projects like @busy.org, @steemstem, @ocd, @adsactly, @actifit, @steem-bounty, @davinci, @partiko are running witness nodes. And quite some other witnesses along them.
You installed a witness node this week yourself. What was the point of doing that again? ;)
For every project I invest in (whether time or money or both), I usually look at the code, build a node, run a node, find a block, try to understand it in its inner workings. I installed @dreamies because I can, and to teach people, also there are plans for an application that would benefit from having a local node but are not yet ready to be announced.
Besides launching a new witness during the worst dip has an ironic message. It's a friendly "fuck you" to all pessimists ;-)
Compared to other chains like btc+lnd which for example run smootly on a raspberry pi 3b, hardware requirements for a steem node are insane, but when I learned in summer that there are only a few public p2p seed nodes I was shocked.
I don't agree this is "the worst dip". It's just the stabilisation phase. And I reckon you know pretty well what you're doing. Don't let yourself get infected with bad thoughts.
Thanks for mentioning us!
Posted using Partiko Android
You're welcome. Any further comment on the question I asked would be very welcome.
The idea of increasing the number of votes is definitely interesting! Can you think of any downside in that?
Posted using Partiko Android