You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Steem Economic Changes Update

in #steem8 years ago (edited)

Would be a shame if it wasn't implemented. A 2 years withdraw period is a burden for most people and the 15% awarded to steem power holders is actually inflation so It's not going to incentivize people to power up. If they keep this 2 year inconvenience I'm not sure how they are going to get people to power up. Participating in the curation game shouldn't have any barrier to entry and even a 3 months lock period creates unnecessary hurdles to participate.
Most people that decided to lock their steem for 2 years did so because it was the only way they could invest in steem, now people can invest in steem without locking their steem. The result is that people investing in steem will probably increase but people curating and powering up will decrease. A few days ago I was suggesting a very short lock time period and to increase the curation rewards percentage to encourage people to curate by giving them the best conditions to do so. The worst thing in this type of platform is if the whole thing is run by bots, you d have no content diversity at all.
A shorter withdraw period also means a faster re-distribution which is key at this point. Locking people's steem for so long will just delay a whole transition process that will be inevitable anyway.

Anyone with a shorter investment horizon than 2-years is unable to participate in the Steem Platform which is discouraging people from bringing capital and increasing liquidity.
The long-term divesting schedule of Steem Power means the network is less efficient when it comes to price discovery.

From this quote though it seems that they want more liquidity and more efficiency when it comes to price discovery, that means a shorter withdraw period.