Lol, that's very good majes. I hope i haven't created the impression that I would be happy about axes and saws! I'm only interested in voluntary approaches to help address these issues ;)
But but, we must... They are draining the reward pool sir !!!!
Let me ask you something since you seem to understand this problem better than most I have seen write about it....
What If, we only had two post in a 24 hour period, and two votes in that same period separated by 12 hours.
Once of those votes outweighed the other by 50%
Would one post earn 50% more than the other ? And would the reward pool be the same as if there were only one post or would it be decreased by 50%
Would the witness's keep producing blocks even though they were empty or would they simply stop for 12 hours until the second post was made and then produce a second block ?
This finite pool everyone speaks of, would it be the same if votes were to decrease by 50 % or would it too decrease by 50 %
It's all just too complicated, hatches, axe, and saws...
Should be fun to watch unless you actually invested in steem...
I will simply say that I don't know the answer to those questions. Hopefully someone with more technical knowledge will answer. If I can claim any understanding, it is normally at the conceptual level which I appreciate can be of limited use at times....this is one of them as I would only be guessing.
Fair enough, I respect your honesty regarding the matter.
I will share an observation for what it is worth. I administer a faily large investing forum, which is why I am online so much. Anyway, when the markets are going well everyone is happy, telling one another how much they admire each other, love in the air.
But when that market turns downward everyone starts looking for someone to blame. It gets fairly heated and many have to dealt with at the administrative level. The Big Red Button...
Steemians aren't happy with steem at 16 cents evidently, herein lies the real problem. So they blame everyone else.
Have a look at any of the numerous charts posted yesterday and notice that huge dip in steem price compared to everything else. That dip wasn't caused by some successful steemian "draining the reward pool" :)
I appreciate your insight and I agree to an extent...there is currently greater friction because the community reacts by trying to create efficiency. If Steem was making new highs daily, there wouldn't be the same focus on how the reward pool is being utilised....but the fact that it is creates an opportunity to try to deal with some of these issues, which would exist anyway, may be useful.
I also appreciate that the affects of steem price on the reward pool far outweighs the attempts to use it in enterprising ways which occasionally causes friction. I'm certainly not against innovation but I would like the most efficient, honest and value generating initiatives to succeed.
The bigger picture here is that a blogging platform will only attract a certain number of quality writers/bloggers/artists/photographers/experts etc. The majority of users on this platform will be readers if it succeeds. In order to help it succeed, it needs to be easier for people to aggregate and find information. Steemit could be the source of a considerable percentage of the world's trusted information. The success of Steemit is not necessarily tied to millions of bloggers but it is tied to attracting the best researchers, journalists, bloggers, writers etc....it's a bit chicken and egg but given the fact that ordinary people like me love Steemit, there is real hope.
Steemit is only the beginning and once the other applications that are exploiting other niches are all working in concert and offering the unique benefits of Steem, the Steemchain and synergies between them all...then the pressure may come off Steemit in a positive way and Steem should begin to make some real moves. It's certainly fun to speculate ;)
Hi @majes - a new block will be produced every 3 seconds regardless of user activity. The blockchain will produce the same amount of rewards regardless of the votes. If nobody voted for 24 hours except for one minnow who upvoted your post, you would get 100% of the rewards.
So then, if a third minnow enters the equation and votes for poster #1 but not poster #2 he then reduces the reward of poster #2 and poster #1 reward increases correct ?
So, flags aren't needed for "guiding the reward pool" at all. Just up vote where you think a reward should go.
If two minnows with equal voting power each vote on two posts (with no other votes cast), then those two posts will each receive 50% of the reward pool.
So, flags aren't needed for "guiding the reward pool" at all. Just up vote where you think a reward should go.
That is not a valid conclusion (IMO).
Let's say you have 20 minnows. 10 of them each vote for 10 unique posts that they think are awesome, and 10 of them collude together to upvote a 'crap post' and split the rewards. My math may be a tiny bit off, but I believe that the post that got 10 votes would get 90% of the rewards, and the other 10 posts would get 1% each.
If a dolphin thought that was unfair, it could downvote the 'crap post', and then the remaining 10 posts would each get 10%.
Increasing the domination doesn't change the mathematics.
Let's stick to the 3 minnow example, if a third minnow votes for one of the 2 post and not the other he is in fact increasing one and decreasing the other.. He doesn't have to flag one to decrease it's value he simply needs to vote the other..
Colluding ? Really ?
So now the argument is conspiracy lol
Hatches and Axes Tim, ya'll go ahead..
Lol, that's very good majes. I hope i haven't created the impression that I would be happy about axes and saws! I'm only interested in voluntary approaches to help address these issues ;)
But but, we must... They are draining the reward pool sir !!!!
Let me ask you something since you seem to understand this problem better than most I have seen write about it....
What If, we only had two post in a 24 hour period, and two votes in that same period separated by 12 hours.
Once of those votes outweighed the other by 50%
Would one post earn 50% more than the other ? And would the reward pool be the same as if there were only one post or would it be decreased by 50%
Would the witness's keep producing blocks even though they were empty or would they simply stop for 12 hours until the second post was made and then produce a second block ?
This finite pool everyone speaks of, would it be the same if votes were to decrease by 50 % or would it too decrease by 50 %
It's all just too complicated, hatches, axe, and saws...
Should be fun to watch unless you actually invested in steem...
I will simply say that I don't know the answer to those questions. Hopefully someone with more technical knowledge will answer. If I can claim any understanding, it is normally at the conceptual level which I appreciate can be of limited use at times....this is one of them as I would only be guessing.
Fair enough, I respect your honesty regarding the matter.
I will share an observation for what it is worth. I administer a faily large investing forum, which is why I am online so much. Anyway, when the markets are going well everyone is happy, telling one another how much they admire each other, love in the air.
But when that market turns downward everyone starts looking for someone to blame. It gets fairly heated and many have to dealt with at the administrative level. The Big Red Button...
Steemians aren't happy with steem at 16 cents evidently, herein lies the real problem. So they blame everyone else.
Have a look at any of the numerous charts posted yesterday and notice that huge dip in steem price compared to everything else. That dip wasn't caused by some successful steemian "draining the reward pool" :)
I appreciate your insight and I agree to an extent...there is currently greater friction because the community reacts by trying to create efficiency. If Steem was making new highs daily, there wouldn't be the same focus on how the reward pool is being utilised....but the fact that it is creates an opportunity to try to deal with some of these issues, which would exist anyway, may be useful.
I also appreciate that the affects of steem price on the reward pool far outweighs the attempts to use it in enterprising ways which occasionally causes friction. I'm certainly not against innovation but I would like the most efficient, honest and value generating initiatives to succeed.
The bigger picture here is that a blogging platform will only attract a certain number of quality writers/bloggers/artists/photographers/experts etc. The majority of users on this platform will be readers if it succeeds. In order to help it succeed, it needs to be easier for people to aggregate and find information. Steemit could be the source of a considerable percentage of the world's trusted information. The success of Steemit is not necessarily tied to millions of bloggers but it is tied to attracting the best researchers, journalists, bloggers, writers etc....it's a bit chicken and egg but given the fact that ordinary people like me love Steemit, there is real hope.
Steemit is only the beginning and once the other applications that are exploiting other niches are all working in concert and offering the unique benefits of Steem, the Steemchain and synergies between them all...then the pressure may come off Steemit in a positive way and Steem should begin to make some real moves. It's certainly fun to speculate ;)
Hi @majes - a new block will be produced every 3 seconds regardless of user activity. The blockchain will produce the same amount of rewards regardless of the votes. If nobody voted for 24 hours except for one minnow who upvoted your post, you would get 100% of the rewards.
Thanks @timcliff :)
So then, if a third minnow enters the equation and votes for poster #1 but not poster #2 he then reduces the reward of poster #2 and poster #1 reward increases correct ?
So, flags aren't needed for "guiding the reward pool" at all. Just up vote where you think a reward should go.
If two minnows with equal voting power each vote on two posts (with no other votes cast), then those two posts will each receive 50% of the reward pool.
That is not a valid conclusion (IMO).
Let's say you have 20 minnows. 10 of them each vote for 10 unique posts that they think are awesome, and 10 of them collude together to upvote a 'crap post' and split the rewards. My math may be a tiny bit off, but I believe that the post that got 10 votes would get 90% of the rewards, and the other 10 posts would get 1% each.
If a dolphin thought that was unfair, it could downvote the 'crap post', and then the remaining 10 posts would each get 10%.
6 post deep thing is just annoying
Increasing the domination doesn't change the mathematics.
Let's stick to the 3 minnow example, if a third minnow votes for one of the 2 post and not the other he is in fact increasing one and decreasing the other.. He doesn't have to flag one to decrease it's value he simply needs to vote the other..
Colluding ? Really ?
So now the argument is conspiracy lol
Hatches and Axes Tim, ya'll go ahead..
thank you timcliff
Welcome.