Why changing the N^2 is a bad choice, imo.

in #steemit8 years ago

Everybody should be happy with the reward pool, at this point.

If you have put in the time, and developed a following, things here are not near as bad as they were when this debate first arose last August.


At that time the whales were in a feeding frenzy, nobody could get rewards because they were all going to the top.

Rather than blaming this on the people clicking their mouse it was blamed on the platform.


Now that we know that the whales are to be commended for allowing the rest of us a chance to earn rewards the N^2 is serving the minnows quite well.

Just look at @darthnava,..  https://steemit.com/blog/@darthnava/fellow-steemers-i-need-help-as-my-mri-results-are-not-encouraging

Without the N^2 would the payout be near as high?

I think not, or changing the algorithym would be pointless.

Either a linear curve drops payouts, or no difference will be noticed.


I know that in the past HardForks were done on orders from on high without much input being desired from the community.

I agree that some of the changes were in fact good ones.

This change coming in HF19 will not serve the masses better than allowing the little fellas' votes to add up exponentially.

As long as the whales don't get into any more frenzies I think we should keep it.


The change I would like to see is a multiplier applied to incoming votes in ratio to how much sp an account holds.

If I have 100sp, I should get my incoming votes multiplied by .0001%.

If I have 200sp, then the multiplier will be .0002%.

This gives an incentive to hodl sp because your income is dependent upon it.

If you power down, your multiplier goes down, and so does your income.

I think the percentage can be miniscule while remaining effective for those that want to maximize returns.

It will also compound the rewards of those that the community supports.

It gives hope to those that hodl, but don't have many followers.

It gives real consequences to powering down.


What do you think?

If you have time, comment below?



Have a perfectly peaceful day.

Keep working, stop paying.

Viva!

Minds.com

Vote FBA King of the World

How to win in court!

How to win in court for far less!!



Sort:  

Currently, the whales are still downvoting/flagging, some are carefully calculating their voting power, and refraining from using all of their stake. So, whether people are for or against the change, what we are seeing is the result of this experiment still going on today.

It would be good to make the code match the intentions and not just count on this method working as we scale. My opinion is a bit mixed, as I understand those who feel this change compromises the motive to hold steem power. Yet, on the other hand, the original formula was "selected" by the development team and it skewed the power too much toward those with stake, IMO. I don't know if my own account will win or lose due to the change, but I do feel it will help us retain new users. Nobody knows until we try it.

I'd think that having the n^2 would allow the current whales to keep any prospective whales in check, and that any future attempted coups would fail.
We can see that @htooms was checked, and he had plenty that won't buy as much, now.
Why decrease the odds that the old guard can guard by making large number of votes count for less?
Doesn't that increase the odds of an @htooms being successful?

I'm told that the new curve will increase the bottom and diminish the top, but how do you think @darthnava would feel if half those rewards weren't there?

Any math you can demonstrate will illustrate better than my speculations, if you have some to show us.

I don't have the math. I don't even know if my own account will improve or decrease. It would be great if someone provided some analytical data. I don't have the skills, access to the code or the ability to "Read" it at that level.

Good luck getting those folks to take time for us, has been my experience.

I also wish they communicated more clearly.

The paradigm rewards close-knit communities, and we are outsiders to coders.

Regarding darthnava, he could easily make another post and have the same results. If the community still wanted to support it. So, that issue kind of doesn't make my radar. (not saying, I am right, I just don't find it concerning.) Someone could even make a follow-up post on his behalf if enough funds were not raised.

PS. I loved watching the community respond also.

It's true, but the lottery effect is good for account retention?

The compromise curve we introduced while I was at steemit is the best of both worlds.

I guess you should know.
I just don't like messing with the original idea more than necessary.
The fish got to get used to the water rather than the other way around, imo, on many things.

Thanks for unleashing this for us,....

well the fish don't even know what a blockchain is, mostly don't understand mathematics and don't want to get confused :| I do get your point, for me it seems like a measure between a "bigger" community vs a "stronger" one, and we are moving into the bigger one where you would need more people to get the same reward.

You said, 'curve', is that to say, 'not linear'?

I like self disciplined whales much more than caged ones,...it's just better social engineering.

Can't say I'm for it. I like a proposal by @dragosroua with witnesses having control of the multiplier on how much is going to authors and curation. Good luck getting the math there :)

https://steemit.com/steemit/@dragosroua/the-fuckup-files-experiment-ending-it-and-final-conclusions

You have a point, the current curve should support trending posts more, and that is why we were getting posts making 1k for the first 10 ones than 100 and then 20 for the rest. A linear curve with the same votes would give probably around 500, 300, 100

I'm not sure steemit will change it since this is the main reason for the fork, there has to be at least 40% agreement, I remember last fork when there were around 80% of witnesses against the comment reward pool. We didn't get one :) I didn't like it either, but I didn't like the 7day payout either, well I can live with that for simplicity's sake.

I'm liking golos' daily and monthly payouts.

I get the simplicity goal.

Suppose I should have made a golos acc too :) I haven't logged there and I've only opened it twice maybe. WEll I'd like some gold :D

Yes, they are undervalued, atm.
They should trade on par with steem, but are at ~.20usd

there are way less people there, probably, and I'm not too sure they have the whales that are here, also putin :|

thanks for sharing