If you want to understand why it was decided to use approval voting for witness voting (and explicitly to not have a downvote option), please read this: (If it is not already clear, @bytemaster in that

You can use steemdb.com to view the raw data of a post and explore the different ways the JSON metadata is used by clients. For example, here is a link to the raw data for your comment. Scroll down to

The Steem blockchain does allow arbitrary JSON to be included as metadata with each post/comment. You can check it out by viewing the post with steemd.com or steemdb.com. Anyway, this proposal is old.

This is a great idea. Unfortunately, it seems like it isn't working right now. I tried using it and haven't gotten a Telegram message confirming my settings even though I sent the correct memo to @null.

There is no longer any mining in Steem. This is an old post and a lot has changed since then.

I think I understand the idea - but why not just let users with no Steem Power upvote without reward? So the "upvote" number goes up by one, but the reward does not change at all. Being able

First, I think we need to at the very least separate out an opinion from a reward adjustment. If a minnow doesn't have enough voting power to upvote content, they should at least be able to signal they

Awesome! Thanks. Yeah, that first-tag rule for forums is tricky. I'm not sure if you actually should bend that rule. However, I would like it if the topic URLs (like show all posts that include that tag

By the way, you might notice that one of the tags of the parent post is #steem-standards: that is the tag I started a while back to discuss standards that most if not all Steem clients should try to agree

Should we just codify it into the system that NO ONE can self-upvote "ever"? Oh wait, what about our botty friends who will upvote their master instead of self-upvoting him or herself? Seems

With a 100% upvote? Right now, it would probably reward you with over $500 worth of value. But I am guessing that was a rhetorical question.

Sounds good. I'll have to go through the math more carefully later. But all those details are "soft-fork" parameters and formulas (other than the account creation tokens state which by itself

I've seen various posts on Steem of people recommending various password managers that they like (you can try searching for those). My preferred password manager would probably not be ideal in this case

It isn't very easy. But I think there are enough well designed tools (password manager services with automatic synchronization and convenient browser plugins) that make it not too difficult to use either.

Just curious, would you say that the loss of convenience with a random strong power is worth the extra security? Yes. 100% yes. but do you think there is a middlepoint between accesibility and security?

Click Here to Open your Account use Account Model Sign-Up Is BitShares going to have to learn the hard way to not allow users to choose their own password? Please, please, please... to BitShares users

I've really enjoyed this service. Much better than steemit.com notifications because of the flexibility it provides, such as blacklisting certain users. One thing that has been driving me nuts though,

What about the following implementation? Keep in mind, I haven't spent a lot of time fully thinking through everything and there could be some errors or other problems (dealing with Ethereum performance

Yes, I think we all would like that. I have no idea what is going on with or what the current status is of stealth/privacy features development for BitShares (there seems to be some controversy / non-technical

Not quite ready for a pull request. It still requires quite a bit more work like actually converting a lot of pseudocode and detailed prose description to actual code that works with the BitShares code