RE: Steem Dollar Stability Enhancements
Gradual Forced Redemption of Steem Dollars for STEEM
Any time the Steem Dollar supply reaches 20% of the market cap, 1% of everyone’s Steem Dollars will be converted to Steem Power at the price feed. This action can be viewed as a partial “bail-in” where everyone is treated equally. This will immediately reduce the Steem Dollar percent of total market cap while preventing immediate dumping of the STEEM which could accelerate the collapse in a positive feedback loop.
Steem Dollar holders that wish to avoid this forced redemption should convert to STEEM and sell on the market. If done via the 7 day conversion process, then the supply should decrease naturally and all Steem Dollar holders can be spared the “bail in”.
Can you imagine what a mess this would be for exchanges and other Steem Dollar holding services? Do not do this.
From conversations in Steem chat, I understand this might already be in the Steem code. For the sake of everyone's sanity, it should probably be commented out or changed on the slightest chance this could happen.
I agree this is not good for the platform and could make some people more skeptical about Steemit posting articles like this from one of the founders of Steemit. This is no better then a government bailout to save there own fiat currency. @dantheman should update this or add more clarification or else this will make people more skeptical of the platform.
This was added to make people more confident. The alternative is to deny reality and pretend this could never happen. The odds are slim, but having insurance is better than denial.
Better lock the SBD (fixed deposit style) than convert it automatically to Steem, and then let the option to users to decide if they want to liquidate the position or keep it as vesting SBD. This has the advantage that people who are not paying attention won't mind if the SBD are vesting, and people who are paying attention will at least get to chose between accepting their SBD to be let in vesting (with higher interest rate) or liquidate the vesting SBD into liquid Steem or Steem Power after the 1-week conversion period. This effectively prevents a run on the bank on SBD and doesn't risk exposing people who are not paying attention to Steem volatility unbeknownst to them.
For more leeway, and to avoid making Vesting SBD feel like capital controls, you could create already a new type of asset called Vesting SBD (the very same to which you will convert liquid SBDs in case of black swan) so that people will already be familiar with it as a form of longer term asset and won't have a knee jerk reaction when they find their liquid SBD was converted to vesting SBD. And to encourage people to put their SBD in vesting proactively (and therefore give the network more leeway), you could pay an interest rate that is a function of the "Liquid SBD supply"/"Total SP market cap" so that the higher the ratio, the higher the interest will be and the higher the incentive to put SBD to vest.
To finance higher interests on Vesting SBD, and desincentivize holding liquid SBD, the interest rate on liquid SBD should be lower, but not that low as to discourage market makers from holding liquid SBD. That way people will keep liquid SBD if they want to cash out soon or do trading, or put it to vest if they just want to hold it there to make interests or until Steem hits the price at which they are keen on converting the vesting SBD to Steem or Steem Power.
Dan, with all due respect but it seems you might be in denial of a whole other scenario ...
(I love steemit and you're a genius, but ...)
what if ... there's no black swan event, but you got so caught up with the mathematics and the monetary side of it all that you lost sight of the community and you're ignoring clear warning signs that somethings is wrong
People are complaining, and whether or not their complaints are valid is irrelevant, they're your costumers and they're not happy!
I'm talking about the way posts sort on the tag-pages, on top it looks great, which means the system as a whole is working ... but the top is still minuscule, while the middle is basically non-existing and there's a massacre going on at the bottom!
Forget about the numbers and listen to your FANS!!
here's my suggestion; take the full list of users, filter out those that got enough steem, those that are not active enough etc etc etc ... but don't be too strict, so you're left with a list of a few thousands minnows and give them each 100 steem power
whether or not that will mathematical work out doesn't matter; it's for the people, it's to get them enthusiastic again ...
what if ... your black swan event is unfolding right now, as you read this ...
The clients are always right, especially when they're are wrong!
Their mood, their perception, their emotions matter more than the facts!
Do something, whatever it is ... do something, do it public and do it NOW!
How would you tell exchanges and services holding user balances to deal with this? Nobody would be happy. If this is sitting in the live code it's a timebomb.
Lack of code is a bomb without pressure releaf. It could be a hair cut, that would make things easier on exchange.
"but having insurance is better than denial" I completely agree on this!
Yeah true. You should really think about making it only take 1 day to convert SBD to SP, because I always transfer my SBD to Poloniex because I don't want to wait 7 days to convert to SP. Steemit should buy back SBD with advertising revenue too.
yeah you should be able to convert direct from SBD to SP
Exactly.
That kind of shenanigans is why many of us are in cryptos and so skeptical of government interference in the first place. I think you need to discuss this with the community further. @dantheman I would urge you to take up @fyrstikken's offer and discuss this on steemspeak
I also think you need to distinctly separate the accounts you use for "discussion" and thinking aloud from those that are "official" Steem matters.
I commend you for being open but sometimes you have to consider the effects this kind of posting has on the confidence of the community who aren't necessarily as free thinking as you are.
It is very easy for people to take things the wrong way and misunderstand online.
I absolutely agree with you. The Steemit trolls will have a field day this post, and take everything out of context. Im not saying that the issues should not be discussed. It just needs to be discussed in much different context and possibly a different venue.
This gives me flashbacks of the BTS merger of Nov 2014, when a lot of misinformation was flying around.
What other venue do you think would be more appropriate? I see this as a blog, a social media site for personal expression, one that even hinders trolls through reputation and flagging. When it comes to more serious policy decision discussions, those happen on Github because code is law.
i am not a programmer OR a blogger ... but I have to say , I'am AMAZED at the growth and importance of Github ..wow .... some of the smartest people & content in the world are there ... imho
Idea !, need a t shirt ... Steemit.com, Where Code is LAW !, lmao
It is, but should we hold back innovation for those who don't understand the implications? To me, this change sounds somewhat reasonable in that it's very unlikely to happen, and it could potentially prevent people's investments from going to 0, which is a really beneficial thing.
I think we have an interesting balance here between those who really understand advanced game theory, economics, software, and cryptocurrency (I would put Dan in that category) and those who just have an opinion (mostly the rest of us).
I, for one, prefer the openness and communication about the possibilities.
From the OP:
This wasn't a decree from on high, but a start of a discussion. How often does the FED involve its subjects in an open conversation about monetary policy?
I'm all for discussion but right now it isn't always clear what is discussion and what is actually policy.
It is hard to separate what @dantheman's personal opinions are from the actual policies of the platform itself.
Some separation and clarity in this regard would not be harmful.
I agree, but I'm not sure how that is practically done. As they say, "Code is law." Dan writes much of the code, so he can dictate the law... but, as we saw recently with a Github issue that is now closed, the community also has a voice and, so far, that voice has power.
I see people with "The tweets here represent my personal view and not the view of my employer" in their bio often, and I always chuckle. "Companies" don't have opinions, only people do. A company can make an official statement, but that happens (in this case) from the steemit blog. To me, I assume everything said is Dan's opinion, even if he uses confusing language like "us" in his posts. That, at least for me, helps me lower cognitive dissonance.
One thing about the mass market, it that it does not think critically. It thinks very very basic, gets things out of context extremely easily and moves impulsively in herds.
I agree ! When I fist came here i felt as if i were settingin on a corp boad meeting ...I was like wtf ? people talking that had NO concept of what was going on or being said, but yet, comments were flowing that had no business being said at a "Board" meeting .. don't get me wrong here .. but come on now, "personal thoughts are WAY diff than 'Official" statements ! man .. Steemit needs a (Like WoW admins in BLUE) official post page (Announcements etc.) IMHO !