Unrelated, but you seem to like to research. Look into acidyo, strawhat, hivegc etc. You will be surprised at what you find.

Unrelated, but you seem to like to research. Look into acidyo, strawhat, hivegc etc. You will be surprised at what you find.

Don't you guys already collect revenue via the deposit and withdrawal fees? Why is the community paying for something that you will benefit from monetarily? Also, $100k? What happened to building a stake

Yep bingo, and stop paying out ridiculous payouts via the DAO. It's a leak in our dam, needs to be plugged.

This is true but a surging price is the best advertisement there is, and people collecting large payouts from the DAO on a regular basis is part of the problem why HIVE continues to trend lower, effectively

Just because that stake has been removed doesn't mean someone else couldn't acquire a very large stake and power it up over time and do exactly the same thing. Sure it wouldn't be quick, but it would be

This doesn't make attacking HIVE easier, it makes controlling it significantly harder. Right now it takes significantly less HP to control the consensus witness spots than 5 votes per account (or 1 vote

I have thought about this plenty and worked out the napkin math as well and it all comes down to one easy trade-off. Someone preventing something from happening is infinitely better than them being able

How do you figure? 1 vote with a sliding voting scale so you can use all your voting power on 1 witness or however many you choose by adjusting the voting weight down.

Most of the other suggested changes probably couldn't have stopped it Changing from 30 votes down to 5 votes (or 1 vote with a slider) wouldn't have stopped it? My napkin math looks like it would have,

Can we also include changing the number of consensus witnesses to something larger, like say 100 for added security? That or change the number of votes from 30 to say 5, or even better would be 1 vote

This isn't really related to this proposal, but do you have plans for an overhaul of the witness structure so we don't see similar things happen again? For example, could we move from 20 consensus witnesses

Doesn't this look like the top witnesses just ensuring they will remain the top witnesses?

Doesn't this look like a form of the Top witnesses just entrenching themselves in the top witness spots?

People talk about this like it suddenly could become centralized in terms of witness selections. Um, it already is. Basically 2 accounts dictate the Top 20 witnesses. Last time I checked there was only

I have long wondered why witnesses don't decline payment on most of their posts? They are extremely well paid in comparison to authors yet they somewhat double dip by also taking from the author reward

Steem doesn't have that great of a rep out there either

I agree.

I think he makes a great point here. The downvote has been rationalized until its supporters are blue in the face but the reality is simply that it is far too negative to work as intended. The user metrics

Yep, you are exactly right. The downvote button is a weapon for negatively much more than it is tool for accurately valuing content. The downvote needs to go, or at least go to a handful of (paid) moderators.