[Poll] Your Opinions on Hardfork 17 Features
This is time to show your opinions on HF17!
Vote any if you like, and downvote any if you don't like to see. (Upvote = agree) All comments decline payout.
- Remove Posting Rate Limit
- The comment depth limit has been increased to 255
- Comments can now be permanently edited
- Comments are now paid out independent of their discussion
- All comments are paid out 7 days after creation and there is no longer a second payout window
- There is now a comment reward fund separate from posts
- All payouts now look at the prior 30 days of payouts to determine the share of the reward rather than the current pending rshares
- Reward Balance
- Comment Reward Beneficiaries
- Delegated Steem Power
- Accounts can be created with a smaller fee and an initial Steem Power delegation
- PoW is being removed
Any discussions are more than welcome!
If you are hard to find options, sort comments by age
Add: Ypu can choose MULTIPLE items.
Items are from @liondani's post
vote a little
Can you add something here to differentiate between "as-is" and with a fix for the 'end of window' lockout issue (https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/900). I support the change, but only with a fix for issue 900.
Okay, but I am on the road now. Will do later
If that's an issue, back 17 and let's schedule your proposed lockout fix for HF18. We don't have the luxury of time.
I share the opinion that while a lot of these things may be good it's too much in one release.
2. The comment depth limit has been increased to 255
What does 255 mean?
It's 200+50+5 and 28-1. This number is special because it is the biggest number that can fit into a byte
nested comments can go up to 255 as opposed to 6 right now.
(I misunderstood the parent's writing) .... I want to see it all ... Is there a way to cancel the upvote in the comment?
Yes, just click on the upvote again and your vote will be changed to 0 weight.
Edit: But what have you misunderstood? Upvoting the post does nothing with the comments. The comments what are count in this poll. For e.g. I UV the post to make it more visible, and will vote for the comments later (bookmarked).
Very good idea!
Love that one
Comment depth limit now causes frustration, annoyance, and make hard to follow threads with the 'mention workaround'. If there isn't any enormous drawback (I don't know about any), it's an easy decision for me. I would accept this.
10. Delegated Steem Power
(I misunderstood the parent's writing) .... I want to see it all ... Is there a way to cancel the upvote in the comment?
you should be able to reverse it just like you made it,....
Im sorry....what does delegated sp mean exactly? Does this mean we can give away SP ?
It means you can "lend" someone else SP.
I could delegate 1000 SP to you and then you could use it to vote and earn curation rewards.
Currently the lender see's no benefits in the existing implementation.
or rent out SP, sounds good to me
So there would be the option to "lend out" for a specified period as well as the ability to actually give away?
what's in it for the lendee?
what if we changed it to this proposal?
https://steemit.com/witness-category/@fyrstikken/voting-power-to-the-people-and-curation-rewards-to-the-investors-please-bookmark-and-read-later-if-you-are-busy (Man I wish we had 255 comment depth now) The "experiment" has shown that this work
Yes.
If you can give it away permanently or just lend it out I would think the lendee would need to attain some form of monetary profit.
The lender see's no benefit.
The lendee can then use that SP to vote and earn curation rewards.
Ok, maybe i've confused who is the lender vs lendee. If I lend to someone, I get no benefit. So why do it?
@fyrstikken I'm not sure I followed it all, but sounds good ;-)
This will be interesting to see, I think its a good thing but I can imagine ways it could be abused.
9. Comment Reward Beneficiaries
If we want (and I want) 3rd parties to use Steem like Disqus, and want developers build great apps, I think this feature is a must. We should provide incentives for growth, and this is a simple and fair way.
1. Remove Posting Rate Limit
the hardfork removes the 4 per day post limit from the protocol level, but steemit.com web site can implement UI upgrades to deal with spam and users who abuse no posting limit, the goal of hf17 is to simplify what happens on the blockchain, making it run more efficient, and put the complicated solutions on the web site
Don't like just removing it. I think it should be based on rep. This would allow established members to post more while keeping spam down from people just doing copy/paste fishing for votes.
Reputation is not a consensus level feature of the blockchain. Meaning it is derived from state, but does not impact state. We have no plans on making it consensus. There were bugs in the bandwidth rate limiting algorithm that have since been fixed. Normal use should not be affected, but spamming most definitely will.
That might be a good next step - but I think removing it and seeing what happens might be a first good step!
People with bots posting thousands of youtube vids a day comes to mind.
I believe there's a second layer of limitations using the "bandwidth" values associated with each account that would hopefully prevent this.
Though I seem to remember somewhere that was getting removed as well. It would be nice to have some clarity on what would prevent this when the post rate limit is removed.
I agree @jesta
Good idea @fubar-bdhr. More rep = the more you can post
I'm against this. Recently I've seen some users post 40 times a day and make $2( mostly autovote) on every post, without the posting rate limit these users would make $80 a day for posting very average content with no effort.If everyone start doing this the site will be full of garbage stuff. The limit encourages users to write quality content.
I would agree with extending it a bit ( 5-10 posts) but not removing it entirely.
edit: This feature should be called "remove earning limit" as it does not restrict people from posting.
I think the post limit should be based on Rep
The main justification for it is that the current model works well for 'blogging' but it is not very well suited for twitter type content. The idea is to put the burden of allocating rewards properly on the community / voters. In theory, if someone is posting a lot of crap posts and getting constantly upvoted - users should be able to detect that and downvote.
@timcliff the downvote can do so only those who have a higher level ... if so can not be said that, in theory, everyone can settle the question .. ..
That is not completely accurate. A downvote affects the post payout based solely on SP. It only affects the reputation though if the person has a higher reputation.
This is a bot problem and/or autovote problem, not a posting limit problem.
There are good ways to do more than 4 posts / days, as timcliff say.
In a situation where on certain apps people would post frequently(like instagram) i believe it would be preferable to remove this limit.
Agreed, for scalability, no post limit is a must or make the post limit based on Rep.
Absolutely contrary. You will see a lot of junk among the topics
I fear that some users could feel the "pressure" to produce as many as possible articles (to earn as much as possible) so that the quality of the articles may decrease. We may see even more "one-image-posts" with very short texts ...
How about paying a small fee (aka 'need of promotion') for every post above a certain limit instead? Let's say, every user has one or two posts free per day and after that needs to promote the post.
Great idea to me @shortcut - I would be in for that!
Not a fan of this at all, we have enough spam as it is
(I misunderstood the parent's writing) .... I want to see it all ... Is there a way to cancel the upvote in the comment?
Click on upvote again, and you will see an option to remove your vote
3. Comments can now be permanently edited
This is the way it always should have been. Of course it should be accompanied by an easy to use history feature to see every edit.
Amen
Actually I am rather often editing my comments and articles if I spot mistakes, but the problem with being able to do that permanently could be that if you answer in a discussion to a comment and later the comment will be changed, your answer doesn't suit to the comment anymore ... discussions could be falsified afterwards. I know, everthing is saved in the blockchain, but ... in practice it could be difficult for the normal user to verify everything.
I agree with @jaki01
I think showing post history is the UI's duty. Also, I would start a brainstorming about votes, which is a harder problem. Imagine someone make a successful post, then editing it to be the opposite of the former one. The votes would still remain, showing many like the post, which were not true.
It's not just for correcting typos, errors, but good for avoiding legal actions (many times it's enough to delete contents that could be attacked legally). Since not everybody anon here (and not will be), I would allow editing a post without expiration.
4. Independent comments are now paid out independent of their discussion
The main reason for this change is so that comments have an equal opportunity to collect rewards. With the current implementation, if there is 5 minutes left on the parent post's payout window and someone makes a great comment - it only has 5 minutes to collect upvotes/rewards. The change will allow it to have its own countdown clock, which starts when the comment is created. Seems like a no-brainer 'yes' :)
Pays out in 4 hours?
It means each individual comment will have it's own individual payout cycle, much like each pays out on it's own cycle. Current I believe comments pay out when the original post pays out.
You cannot comment after the post's payout now. Note that, there is a second, 30 days payout in the system.
But with the HF proposal to make final payouts after 7 days - there will no longer be a 30-day second payout, right? So if the comments payouts are separate, they would also have final payout at 7 days. I'm assuming that no new comments would be allowed after original post payout then, but have not seen any wordage about it.
@merej99 (nesting limit)
Yes, after HF17, only one 7 days long payout period remains.
Since comments count as individual posts in the new system (as you have said, they have separate payout window), I don't see any reason why we shouldn't allow comments after the posts payout.
Why now it is that it works as payment for comments?
I don't see the point in this, other than maybe to slow the the amount of steem given out daily
The amount of STEEM given out via the rewards pool will not change.
Agreed
This has my vote because it improves the incentives for continued discussion on a post.
11. Accounts can be created with a smaller fee and an initial Steem Power delegation
There is a fee now?
Last I checked SP was still being given out for account creation...
I guess weve passed that stage?
There's always been a fee. Steemit.com has just been paying the fee everytime someone signs up.
The old (fee based) model still exists and isn't going away, but this is a new way of creating accounts by paying a smaller fee and then delegating something like 11x the fee as SP to the account.
The word fee is somewhat misleading. The amount of the 'fee' ends up as SP in the new account. It would be better termed 'initial SP balance'
@smooth , you seem like a balanced representative of steem. I've always thought so. Voted for you as a witness.
Thank you for the vote. I'm not a representative of anyone other than myself. I'm happy to have your support in any case. I mean as a witness I do try to follow the views of those who vote for me, but it is more of an informal thing.
@smooth
speaking of views - someone left something about it in your chat
please check thanks!