You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: 🚨 The "Witness Situation" 🚨

in #witness-category6 years ago

I am working very hard to compile some data to share for all to consider.

It will shine some light on some very interesting patterns in dead witness voting in the top 100 witness positions.

I am working hard to get to a good way to present the information, it's a lot to put out and a lot to take in.

Please stay tuned, it's coming soon as possible!

I am working with another witness to compile this with a 3rd watching over, to ensure a fair review of the information with no modifications.

They can name themselves here if they like, otherwise, to protect their status as is, I'll leave it to them for now. When I publish, they will be sharing in the news.

@SirCork
Steem Witness #71

Sort:  

Excellent. One question you might want to look into is, how much SP/vests is needed to push any user up into the top 20 witness list, and whether it's possible. Is it possible for there to be a "revolution", if we make it easier for smaller stakeholders to monitor and update their witness votes.

Another way to look at the problem now is that it's too costly for each individual to monitor witnesses relative to the marginal benefit coming in, i.e. the principal-agent problem. In listed companies, we instead have a board of directors who are meant to act for shareholders and monitor executives. If we do the same here, can we move the needle towards more productive witnesses?

I've done that math and buying your way in is possible, but it is an exorbitantly high number

What's the number? Or a very large number of small stakeholders? I can wait for your post too if you don't have it now.

Most users don't vote because they don't bother monitoring witnesses. Monitoring is an expensive activity, and also a public good - because you gain equally from the efforts of others who monitor witnesses, even if you don't bother putting in the effort, you can free-ride on the efforts of others, so there is complete market failure. The end-result is that most users don't bother monitoring and voting, and the smaller you are, the less likely you are to vote.

One solution is to create a Steemit "board of directors". Copy and pasted from another comment I put up...

How about creating an account for other users to proxy. The account will act as a a Steemit board of directors, whose job is to monitor witnesses and update witness voting patterns on a regular basis. Designated and anonymous (to prevent corruption) "enforcers" will contribute and vote for who makes up the list each month/quarter.

In other words, a curie or qurator for witness voting, but the key will be to design the internal mechanism so that directors have an incentive to be honest instead of siding with a select few witnesses.

Last time I quickly calculated the cost of buying a top witness position, it was about $15 Million USD (but the price changes constantly).

Thanks for appearing in this thread, I know you have a lot on your plate man. I appreciate all you are committed to and stand for. Not only with the #youarehope foundation, the entire network and for the good of the whole.

While I feel "colluding" is definitely a strong suggestion, raw data does not lie. In any team building there may inherently be private lines of communication, however building trust, integrity and authenticity also requires transparency imho.

So I am very much anticipating only positive outcomes from your report. As we both know, friends don't have to be made to spark progress and if someone has to shine the light for change so be it. Too many lives are being effected by the stalling on transparency, steemit roadmap failures and the oligarchical hardfork approval process.

Wholeness.

Meritocracy > Aristocracy, and I will fight for that to the bitter end.

I'm on it.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.17
TRX 0.13
JST 0.030
BTC 56587.45
ETH 2991.05
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.15