RE: Moats and Walls, and compromises: A perspective on Power Down Time and a compromise through Savings

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Moats and Walls, and compromises: A perspective on Power Down Time and a compromise through Savings

View the full context

bashadow in #steem • 5 years ago

When you invest in a CD, (Certificate of Deposit), in a bank or a lending institute for a certain set APR, if you choose to withdraw your funds you do not get that rate, and there are penalties that are assessed if you close out before the set agreed upon time frame, generally 6 months to a year.

I think giving a well spelled out option for a shorter time frame may help with investors, but I think anything less than 4 weeks is defeating the entire purpose of why there is a power down cycle.

Also 100% agree this is not something that should be in the SMT HF. SMT's have been talked about for to long to have Oh, this would be nice to have in the HF also BS. Peoplehave been saying for over a year now that SMT will have it's own HardFork, we do not need to add anything to it that is not SMT related.

5 years ago in #steem by bashadow

0.00 BPC

2 votes

Sort:

Trending

[-]

lucylin 5 years ago

The fundamental difference here though, is that you are investing your time (labor), for rewards for content.
The creator is creating the asset.

Very different than entering into a financial loan.
The creators are not borrowing. (or lending).

but I think anything less than 4 weeks is defeating the entire purpose of why there is a power down cycle.

What was the purpose?
....to make the markets less volatile?

0.00 BPC

2 votes

[-]

bashadow 5 years ago

I am not sure why the power down cycle other than to prevent dump a lot in vote your self a lot, set your witnesses, take the funds out, wash rinse repeat cycle, at least that is what seems to be the reason.

There is no wait to take out rewards that people/curators/creators get, some of them only power up a little bit or only have the stuff that is powered up automatically and take the rest out. There is that wait for the 13 weeks if you are set at 100% stake option, but for the 50/50 option no wait at all for half of the rewards. If they want a shorter time for the creators, the curators, the non investors, to take out their rewards, then they could just add a few more staking options. A 25/75, a 10/90, or a 100% all liquid option.

However the main point of all this decreased time is to tie it to a popular or what appears to be a popular, HF. The next HF is supposed to be about SMT's, they, (lots of people), have been talking about SMT having it's own HF, this has nothing to do with that. It is just like a politician having a pet project that he knows will be vetoed inserting it into legislation that is popular and unlikely to be vetoed.

The investors are lending, expecting a set return, and that makes it a financial issue for them. Granted most people are investing their time for rewards and anyone that says otherwise unless they have selected the no payout option are lying to themselves as to why they are here and not somewhere else with a larger audience.

We no longer live in an era of one-size fits all, I think people just want to have options for those "life is a bitch" moments.

0.00 BPC

1 vote

[-]

ddrfr33k 5 years ago

What if the burn option were added to the current 13 week cycle?

0.00 BPC