RE: Reducing the number of witness votes
Hmmmm. Don't know mate. I thought the witnesses were meant to be working to together. 7 votes only - expect 3 different factions to arise - either working against each other or colluding.
I think the idea of decaying voting power is good.
As far as someone hacking an exchange to then powerup and vote in their own witnesses.... well I suppose they might - but wouldn't they be more likely want to keep a low profile, remain liquid and sell as fast as they can?
My thoughts are that the current system does work well. Good actors are brought into the 20 and bad actors are removed. 30 votes is tough - but fair for all.
Finally I agree with the point about the other witnesses and giving them a go. It is not just about the 20 it is also about the 100+ backup servers and the rate by which they are remunerated.
Cheers.
SirKnight.
Posted using Partiko Android
If for example there were 3 factions, they all need to agree on hardforks. That makes hardforks smaller (they won't be able to push mass amounts in one) and much better checked for inconsistencies most likely.
I don't think the factions would necessarily develop in that way but there would be camps. Super majority would still have a place which means at least two camps have to agree.
THe low profile would only be in the initial stages but even then, does anyone really know who Freedom is?
These are all with over a million own SP (first 3 are steem)
How many need to be bribed to hold the entire top 20 with ease and become essentially unassailable? I am not saying they would but everyone has a price. with 7 votes they would need to buy more votes and convince a more diverse range of people.
At this stage, if the need arose SteemInc could step in and elect all the witnesses under both methods anyway. I will leave the conversation now, as the more I think about it, the more I think we should extend the voting out to 50 as EOS is looking to do. I would say that in time whale steem holdings will become more dilluted and the backup witnesses will become more important - so more votes is more decentralised.
Posted using Partiko Android
Once this happens it immediately becomes centralized. In time it might be better to have more votes but at the moment it is a risk. You mentioned to TC a person with 5 million buying a position, with 15 million they have all positions.
Doesn't work this way T. Someone buys up 15 million Steem - price goes up. Meaning Witness earnings go up, more Steem gets staked by exchanges etc to retained witness position. 15M steem is a little over 5% of all Steem. Sure it is going to help a great deal - but they will still need to make friends.
Posted using Partiko Android
It is the number of friends they need to make that is the difference. With a couple of the right friends, all positions are locked firm.
Not 20 positions though. And thinking logically - why would anyone invest 15M in Steem to ruin it? They could build and operate their own Steem blockchain.
I see that you have a level of passion for this issue T - for me it is just something trivial some of the whales moan about.
At its core - the witness voting system is fair and will work well. It may just take a few years for more dolphins and whales to come along to reach potential. IMO.
Posted using Partiko Android