You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Non-lineair rewards: convergent linear vs fish-size bonus
A 500mv influence cap makes the n2 math work for everybody.
None of the large active accounts want that even though most whale stake is idle now, not voting.
My proposal is combine the steem and steemit accounts, subject them to super majority witness control, code them to downvote votes in excess of 500mv(slowly ascending as we grow), and make the dolphins and minnows decide what content gets rewarded.
~2000 accounts giving noteworthy rewards will attract more fish than 10 accounts giving 30% of rewards to 10 authors, imo.
@statsmonkey
I think that might crash the bid bots, too.
Doesn't exactly look like an in any way fair reward scaling function.
X-axis in this graph runs from 1SP up to the whole available supply of STEEM as SP.
The purple line makes absolutely no sense or me. Maybe you could do a blog post comparing the above five options and reasoning why you feel the purple one would be the best option. Because right now, it looks like the absolute worst option off all.
Thank you, I've been waiting for somebody that would graph the math for years.
If you could show a graph of what happens to vote values when the n2 is capped at 500mv, i think you will see why I'm still liking it.
With that graph I'd be overjoyed to make a post, presuming it shows what i think it will show.
During the 800mv experiment my ~2mv went from infintesimal vote value to .10stu.
The curve, I'm betting, does a better job of drawing users because the lottery feel comes back.
Instead of ten votes giving ten posts ~30% of daily rewards, with another 30% going to vote buyers, as it is now, the reward pool spreads out to whomever the dolphins vote for. (@statsmonkey)
~2000 accounts handing out significant rewards beats having to buy votes to get any rewards at all, in my book.
Even better if the ~1000 top accounts get rock star status, the 100 accounts that could get that now mostly sell their votes.
The advantage of this math gives a reason to max out investment while not making the game unplayable for the working poor.
Speculators can still speculate on price, but can no longer tip the boat over.
Specifically, the graph will show how the vote value differs from the various curves.
I dont know how to input historic data to include real use cases of votes.
Maybe averages?
Your graph shows the purple line dropping value where it should be flat?
Which would essentially be the red line targeted to 500mv, but with a longer tail.
There are only ~70 accounts impacted by a 500mv cap, but they hold the most stake weight to vote.
Too bad for all of us that they refuse to stop the maximizers from screwing everybody else, imo.
I think it would be very good for steem if stinc locked up the steem account to downvote votes in excess of 500mv (slowly acsending as the dolphins multiply).