Sounds interesting @timcliff although the technical bit is a bit above my pay grade. I do feel, however, that more people being able to contribute would be helpful.
When you say 17/21 witnesses are you reffing to the 21 witnesses that appear at the top of the table? Do the ones with less power have no say in how the blockchain is developed?
Thanks for the SBD/Steem payout ratio information. I was asking another witness about that today so now I don't need his answer. 😁
For a hardfork to take effect, 17 / 21 of the witnesses need to vote 'yes'. The 21 witness votes come from the 20 top witnesses + 1 backup.
Backup witnesses do get a 'say'. They can contribute to the discussions, and express the way they plan to vote.
If a backup witness is voting in a way that the stakeholders like, and the top witnesses are voting in a way that the stakeholders don't like - then the backups may be voted in as the new top witnesses.
Thank you for the explanation @timcliff.
If a backup witness is voting in a way that the stakeholders like, and the top witnesses are voting in a way that the stakeholders don't like - then the backups may be voted in as the new top witnesses.
Whilst this is true in theory, from what I've read about the amount of power the top 20 witnesses have and how they vote for each other, it doesn't seem very likely that this could ever happen in practice, as things stand currently.
Until very recently I thought that witnesses got their spots in the table by number of votes. I didn't realise that power voting came into play.
Given that scenario it's hard to see how smaller stakeholders could really get themselves heard. 😊
I've read about the amount of power the top 20 witnesses have and how they vote for each other, it doesn't seem very likely that this could ever happen in practice, as things stand currently.
Don’t believe the FUD. It is definitely possible for hard working witnesses to work their way to the top by adding value. I’m actually one example ;) as is @followbtcnews and @jesta.
Given that scenario it's hard to see how smaller stakeholders could really get themselves heard.
If you read the whitepaper, that is somewhat by design. It is not necessarily that they have no say, but the voice of the larger stakeholders is intended to have more weight.
Thanks again for the information @timcliff.
I was already voting for you before this conversation (I must have read something good about you somewhere 😂) but I appreciate your responding to my misgivings in a kind and thoughtful manner. It is not always the case! 😁
I haven't read the whitepaper to be honest but the post I read about the implications of the top 20 witnesses voting for each other was a statistical one by someone I trust.
However, if it is
definitely possible for hard working witnesses to work their way to the top by adding value.
that is indeed good news, especially as we have some new community focused witnesses such as @steemcommunity and @danielsaori joining the fray!
@followbtcnews and @jesta already have my vote too so I must have read good stuff about them as well! 😁
Since you made your post I notice we are now being paid in Steem again and now I know why! 😊