You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Thoughts on Reducing the Power Down Period to 4 Weeks from 13 Weeks Currently

in #stake3 years ago

Here is my vision for this:
The idea to shorten the withdrawal time has long ripened.
I would reduce it to 1 week.
There is no opportunity to vote during this week.
As protection, white addresses are used, the change of which is possible under certain conditions (you can think about the conditions)
I like the idea of ​​white addresses to which I can deduce. Speculators move the price on markets around the world, so we need them like air !!! I am 100% sure of this
We need speculation and they are not there - all investors are here due to the circumstances.
I don’t like the idea of ​​losing 5% of the money I earned (are you not a bank or you want to take a step back ??? @aggroed or who is the initiator of the idea? - I appeal to you. Even if it is burned, I am against it.
I do not want to go to jail and no one wants to - I must quickly operate my own funds as I see fit. Today I vote, tomorrow I want to leave - only such conditions attract people and money!

Posted via Steemleo


I agree we need more liquidity for Steem and before we'll have enough, big investors will be less interested to invest in Steem. And I don't talk about speculators, I talk about investors who may look at Steem as a growing business. Speculators can work anywhere, as long as there is liquidity. They don't even have to power up. And yes, we need more speculators too, because on any market and any asset class they provide most daily transactions.

I think the 5% fee was chosen for the easiness of implementation, compared to other options. I believe theycallmedan came up with it. I wouldn't support a solution where a speculator is enticed to be a shareholder to take major decisions on the blockchain. And that would be a solution that has no downside for the speculator (i.e. the fee). I still had my own two cents about this idea which would make the accounts less exposed to being cleared out, if they are compromised. You don't want to pay the fee? You power down normally.

No one should pay these stupid 5% (why not 10% why not 95%).
People require quick unlocking - the task of developers to do this and come up with a simple and safe option (there are a million options for how to do this)
It’s just someone’s profitable that you don’t have the opportunity to quickly exit - I’m 100% sure of this

There are different options for sure. One of them would be to give up voting rights (for witnesses and SPS proposals in particular) and the interest, for the ability to quickly exit at no fee. I don't think a fee would be necessary then.

This is already better - you need a great discussion with the community - glad to meet you!

:) You know, I was debating with you the instant withdrawals thing, but that's not what I support.

I would, as an alternative, if there is the opt in option (or a different solution) to protect those who want protection in case their accounts get compromised. But there are other proposals I find better. I linked them in the post.

Option 3.1. very good - you have to think more (truth is born in a dispute!)

As it is presented there, with full power down after one week and no other restrictions I don't agree with. Too beneficial to speculators, too detrimental to people seeking protection.

  • Speculators will advance the price
  • you can think of ways to protect people.
    Then a steem from an old man who is barely moving will turn into a young sportsman) We need to run, we need mass adaptation. this is just my opinion, but I'm sure of it