GuiltyParties Witness Update
We updated the node to version 0.20.7. The node replayed overnight. It signed its first block as 0.20.7 without an issue.
We remain dedicated to supporting the Steem blockchain and ecosystem. Recently there's been a lot of talk about and amongst witnesses of all levels of support around the ROI of witnessing. Yes, prices are down. Yes, it's unlikely all the servers and equipment will be paid for from blocks produced. We are fully aware that we are operating at a financial loss.
I personally believe in standing by the commitments I've made and that includes my commitment to Steem. I made that commitment when I brought the GuiltyParties brand on board here and I have no issues with keeping true to that commitment. To that effect, I will continue to provide constructive input/feedback/criticism where applicable and to support innovation and sanctity of the Steem blockchain and ecosystem. I also walk the walk.
I will also continue to keep the brand centered on Steem and wherever it pops up on other chains will be in a bridged manner. GP has always been known for bridging projects.
By now most of you who read this and who deal with myself on various chats know that I don't sugarcoat anything and I don't mince words. At the same time, I don't outward insult people for the sakes of insulting them. All our projects are geared towards bringing something beneficial to the table.
Project Updates
These points are in no particular order and don't constitute the full range of our contributions. If you don't know what we're doing then we're really doing something wrong.
- The two highlighters continue running while being tweaked. The #steemsilvergold highlighter in particularly has missed good posts and we're still trying to perfect the filtering.
- We've got @spl tournaments planned and coming up.
- Work on everything BRO is continuing and you'll see more information coming out soon.
- Working on some Github commits which are coming soon too. Personally trying to get more into development.
- Still a member of the @steemcleaners team and focused on supporting communities. You can see more of that if you follow the @steemcleaners blog.
- Projects like @plentyofphish or https://www.pofpofpof.com are continuing to run.
- Recently got into the curation project field with an experimental type of approach. Some of you know what it is already.
- Finally, asking that you keep encouraging and supporting the effort to get STEEM listed on @Niffler by going to https://niffler.co/goal/steem and signing up. Post blogs about it, get the word out. Everything helps!
 |
Like what we're doing? Support us as a Witness.Go to https://steemit.com/~witnessesSelect or type in guiltypartiesClick VOTE if typed in
 |
What are your thoughts on the effort in the past to manipulate the SBD supply to create an artificially high quantity to suppress SBD value?
The manipulation was the decision to not reinstate SBD conversions in the Steemit wallet which only directs people to use the market. The other mechanism to manipulate the SBD supply was the change to HF20 to remove the conservative SBD creation cut off.
This manipulation was a gamble that backfired and resulted in a conversion rate of 2:1 to 3:1 conversion SBD to STEEM when that conversion could have happened back when SBD conversion to STEEM could have been 1:1.
Back when the removal of the conservative cut off was announced, I voiced my opinion that this was dangerous and recommended that witness and Steemit Inc consult an economic expert first. This request was ignored.
Finally, if you were in the top 20, would you accept a change to our currency with knowing that Steemit Inc or witnesses have not consulted a economic expert? Would you consult an economic expert yourself?
The general rationale for keeping the SBD pegged through any means seen as beneficial for attracting investment and keeping true to the whitepaper. It's not without side effects and has had an adverse effect on STEEM. Many witnesses in general are more concerned with generating SP for flashy projects than witnessing. Not everyone by far. If you pull up the witness list you can easily see who set their own parameters and who just goes with the flow.
In one sentence: It's a matter of simplicity over rewards. Investors want stability in some respects. They don't want to calculate when they were told that it's pegged. Coming into the ecosystem with a project, they're unconcerned with scaling the learning curve. This of course affects their own revenue and that of everyone else. The exact same thing can be said about the conversion function. Part of the reasoning to eliminate what they call "advanced functions" from the wallet by removing the conversion tool was the lack of good conversion decisions by users. Users, including investors, were converting and failing to gain the profits they would by selling due to their own misunderstanding or lack of research.
(Going from that on a side note: The general assumption that I find is this: 1. users are stupid and lazy 2. users need to be protected from mistakes 3. users will be "driven to" abuse the system if easy revenue streams are not provided. I don't mean to say that's Steemit Inc's assumption; this has been the general outlook I keep observing, especially now that I'm with the Steemcleaners. It does all harm and no good.)
I'm personally divided on the matter. On one hand I end up pitching the Steem blockchain to a lot of project owners and investors and keeping the SBD pegged is a good selling point. On the other hand, it severely restricts revenue and impacts STEEM as we've seen. What I think we need isn't an economic expert coming in (it would be extremely difficult to find one in the first place) but a survey of external potential investors (already started talking to current investors about the development portion of this) to ascertain whether a stable, pegged SBD factors into the attractiveness of the blockchain for investment. My main focus is investment. It drives development and innovation and wards of stagnation. Stagnation is the real killer.
If I were in the Top 20 I would hopefully be in a position to get the above done and get my Slack account reinstated so I can keep working with my fellow witnesses in one place rather than having to message everyone on ten different chats. My other priority would be following through on that deal I set up to get STEEM listed on smaller exchanges through a discounted service. I'm not against getting an economic expert but I know the amount of work that would take, not to mention money. We do have thinkers on this platform like @ats-david already. The majority is unconcerned. If you were to have a report by an independent expert right now I'd wager that no one would read it.
My witness team doesn't just accept everything "suggested" by others. We don't upgrade the servers without reviewing the code changes (not going to say that we don't miss things too), we have our own price feed script, we run our own witness for starters, and we pick our parameters.
Apologies this is jumbled. Had to get up several times while typing it, still sick as all hell.
I have a suggestion to deal with finding an expert. Simply go down to your local college and chat with an economics professor. I can't imagine an economics professor that wouldn't be intrigued by the STEEM model. The professor may even get some students to perform a study on the subject as a college assignment. A student might even want to do a dissertation on the STEEM model for their doctorate. Someone like yourself can pull blockchain data or find existing data to supply the students for statistical evaluation.
I agree that the removal of the conversion option was the correct decision when the price was high to protect people from converting at a bad price. The problem is that I called for a reinstatement of the option when the price of SBD hit $1.00 which was met by resistance. I also suggested that the proposed HF20 change was not a good idea and that witnesses and Steemit Inc consult an economic expert which didn't happen.
As far as the "pegged" concept goes, that was a severe misunderstanding of what they created. If they understood it, they would understand that calling SBD a pegged currency was not correct. Steemit Inc should have consulted an economic expert during the writing of the whitepaper. The SBD is however, quite genius for what it does. It creates a source of revenue that otherwise wouldn't exist. It also becomes cheaper to pay as the price of SBD goes up. The United states uses the same thing. It is called a savings bond. The problem is instead of keeping the debt low and the price of SBD high which increases the flow of new revenue, people wanted the peg so bad that they opted instead of shutting down that source of revenue to manipulate the peg all while creating a dangerous amount of debt.
This is why we need economic experts to weigh in. Our investment is at stake and deserves at least that much before any changes or manipulation takes place.
We have no shortage of PhD's here and that amounted to nothing. One of them actually made a botnet. I'd go the route of putting out a formal request for a professional with a strong background, education, experience and references if this was being actualized. I don't know how much they charge. Most professionals will be $100-$200 /hr so let's go with that. Sure you can get someone low level for nothing but their report will have no industry recognition and will be generally worthless. Why would witnesses with advanced degrees listen to some random "expert"?
I don't like talking about things that can be done for the purposes of deliberation. I'd talk about actually getting them done. If you want to get the expert then first we need to find case studies of where on other chains one was brought in, if a firm was contracted, how much it cost, what the results were, etc. They're not working for free. Can set up a task group of users/witnesses here that understand procurement management and make a project out of it.
In all honesty I was originally under the impression the conversion option would be reinstated. Then it turned out it was permanent. I can't remember where it was discussed, probably Github.
So is that the apocalyptic scenario? One where steem price goes so low that there aren't enough people willing to run witness nodes and steem blockchain dies? Also just voted for you
Thanks for the vote. No, that won't happen. There's always going to be sufficient witness nodes. We'll likely see some witnesses drop off, mainly ones that are focused on the ROI or ones who just can't afford the servers, but there'll always be enough.
Thanks for the re assurance!