RE: [공지] @proxy.token 증인 투표 운영 방침(@proxy.token witness voting policy)

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

Powerdown is a great conversation. I think we have to make it faster for investors and people only interested in post rewards, but we have to keep it slow for actual chain governance. It's bad for the chain to let people who only want to turn a very short profit to be able to take control of how the chain operates and have no stake in it's long term existence.

I currently think the best way to accomplish this is to treat steem in savings account like a SP delegation back to the account owner. So, If I @aggroed move 50k liquid steem into savings the blockchain also treats that like a 50k Sp delegation to @aggroed.

Majority of chain stake supports downvotes for steem and choices for SMTs. When we make it through this all commmunities can choose to have an SMT without downvotes.

Every smart contract chain ends up at the same place. it can't transact. Human creativity >> 1 set of servers. The best option is to limit smart contracts through layer 2 solutions and not make them entirely open. Splinterlands and steem-engine both show how you can get all the features of smart contracts with steem without forcing all computing through one set of servers. Smart contracts can also be ignored. Cryptokitties can just stop putting gen 0 on their website.

4 subsription. On the Splinterlands market we charge 5% and give it back to tournaments. We did this to give some incentive to 3rd party apps to form. Something similar could be done with steemit.com.



0
0
0.000
1 comments
avatar

I like the creative use of the savings account, elegant implementation for a non-governance, faster powerdown.

I am still not convinced by additional free downvotes, we always had downvotes, they just cost VP.

With a consensus steem-engine, it would be harder to claim steem can't do smart contracts. Thank you for pushing so hard on layer 2, so steem blockchain can aim for LTS!

0
0
0.000