create account

Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate by steemitblog

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com
· @steemitblog · (edited)
$1,360.46
Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate
http://drupal.org/files/release-candidate.png

Steemit is proud to announce a major upgrade to the Steem protocol today.  It is our desire to give everyone in the community ample time to review the code and upgrade their software before any hard-fork occurs.  Our release process will go as follows:

1. [Publish Release Candidate](https://github.com/steemit/steem/releases/tag/v0.14.0rc1)  (Today)
2. Confirm Release in one week (9/9/2016)
3. Protocol changes effective 9/13/2016 at 11 AM EST  (3 PM GMT)

## New Features

### Escrow Transfers 

The Steem network now comes with native support for advanced escrow transfers of STEEM and Steem Dollars.  The purpose of escrow is to facilitate peer to peer trade with untrusted individuals. 

Someone wanting to pay via escrow will create an escrow transaction and specify who should receive the funds, who the escrow agent is, and the terms of the contract.  The escrow agent and the receiver must both accept the terms within the specified time or the funds are returned to the sender.  

Once the terms have been accepted by all parties, the funds are considered to be β€œin escrow”. Once in this state the sender can release funds to the receiver, or the receiver can return the funds to the sender.  If either the sender or receiver has issues they can raise a dispute at which point in time the escrow agent has authority to release some or all of the funds to either the sender or the receiver.  If no action is taken for a specified period of time, then the funds are released to the receiver.

This process directly mirrors the basic escrow contracts used in real life escrow transactions. This will facilitate the creation of craigslist or eBay like websites powered by Steem.

### Savings Accounts 

Savings accounts allow you to protect your liquid STEEM and Steem Dollars in the event your account is hacked / stolen.  All transfers out of savings accounts have a 72 hour delay during which the sender can notice, recover their account, and cancel the transfer.  

This feature is hugely beneficial for any and all exchanges using Steem. The vast majority of their holdings should be kept in savings accounts to minimize the potential loss from a hack. Users should strongly encourage exchanges to adopt Savings accounts and be wary of maintaining deposits on exchanges that do not adopt this security feature.

### Revoking Voting Permissions

This feature is useful for those who want the economic benefits from Steem without the legal liability associated with the political influence holding Steem Power grants them.  

### Custom Binary Operations

The semantics are the same as the custom json operation, but with a binary payload. The json deserialization has a non-trivial cost associated with it. This operation will allow for binary deserialization of plugin operations and should improve overall performance of plugins (subchains / sidechains) that chose to use it.

### Witness Scheduling Updates 

Witnesses that have not produced a block or updated their witness data in at least 24 hours will not be scheduled until they show proof-of-life by updating their witness data.  Witnesses can now voluntarily retire from their position at any time.  This should improve the overall network reliability and reduce the total number of missed blocks.

## Bug Fixes

### Steem Dollar Stability 

Starting when Steem Dollars are 2% of the market cap, a portional of content rewards will be awarded as Steem instead of Steem Dollars. The rate at which Steem Dollars are printed is 50% of the reward at 2% or less market cap and 0% at 5% or more market cap, linearly extrapolated from 2%-5% market cap. So, at 3.5% market cap content rewards will be 25% Steem Dollars, 25% Steem, and 50% Steem Power.

When Steem Dollars reach 10% of the market cap, the price feed will jump off the peg to keep Steem Dollars at 10% of the market cap and will return to the peg when the reported price feed goes below 10%. Witnesses should still report the real dollar value of Steem for their price
feed. The median price feed is automatically capped regardless of what witnesses report.

This change is designed to protect the blockchain from a theoretical, but highly unlikely, event where by the SBD debt would completely devalue Steem.  Steem holders are now guaranteed that SBD holders will never be entitled to more than 10% of the market cap.

### Cleanup of @null
Balances of the null account and zeroed every block. Because any funds in the null account are inaccessible, they are removed every block and the dynamic global property object is updated to reflect the actual totals. This will remove funds from the supply, slowing the rate of inflation.

### Target Votes of 5 per Day instead of 40 

We are changing the target number of votes per day from 40 to 5 so that more people keep their voting power below 100%.  The purpose of this change is to rebalance power toward normal users and away from bots.  You can still vote as often as you like, this change merely impacts the speed at which voting power is consumed. 

### Miscellaneous Bug Fixes 

1. Fixed a bug that was preventing votes from being completely removed from a post.
2. Posts are now editable up to the second payout when they are archived.
3. Removed legacy PoW operation from witness plugin.
4. Increased the irreversible block threshold to 75%.


## Future Roadmap 0.15.0 and beyond

There are a number of features that didn’t quite make the cut for this release, but will be ready for the next release scheduled for mid October. These features include:

### Lost Password Recovery 

Any account can nominate another account as a lost password recovery agent.  This agent will have the power to request a reset the owner key after at least 60 days of account inactivity.  If the account is still inactive 30 days after the password reset is requested, then it will take effect. 

Users must opt-in to this feature. By default the recovery agent will be @null.  A user can opt-out of the feature at any time by changing the agent back to @null. 

### Proposed Transactions with Chained Confirmation 

This feature will work very similar to the proposed transaction feature found in BitShares but with the ability to confirm multiple chained transactions in a single step.  This feature will greatly aide the development of side / subchains.


## Feedback Wanted 

Our team is always looking for new ideas and feedback.  Please review the code, test it out, and help us find and fix any undiscovered bugs between now and the final release confirmation.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and 367 others
πŸ‘Ž  
properties (23)
authorsteemitblog
permlinkannouncing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem","steemit"],"users":["null"],"links":["https://github.com/steemit/steem/releases/tag/v0.14.0rc1"],"image":["http://drupal.org/files/release-candidate.png"]}
created2016-09-02 19:33:57
last_update2016-09-02 19:34:45
depth0
children324
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1,290.477 HBD
curator_payout_value69.985 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length6,580
author_reputation332,472,558,821,177
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,422
net_rshares113,678,944,037,839
author_curate_reward""
vote details (432)
@adamt ·
Good to see some changes, which have drawn a range of responses. In terms of improvements/enhancements I like the promoting aspect, but I think there is still a way to go with bring older content back into the community (for a price of course!) - this was my post, from 5 days, in case anyone wants to read it:

https://steemit.com/steeemit/@adamt/another-proposition-to-get-older-stories-in-the-spotlight

"So, it seems that after 24 hours, most stories wither and die. This may well be a great way to ensure original AND fresh content, but what if you want to get it out there again? How about the concept of a 'power bump' by which you pay a sliding scale of steel to get your story back within the new story timeline, say x steem for 1 hr, 4x for 6 hrs, 12x for 12 hrs and 24 x for 24 hrs. The economic trade off vs a gamble might be Interesting to view and it could plough some steem back into the pot

Thoughts?"
properties (22)
authoradamt
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t023447460z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steeemit/@adamt/another-proposition-to-get-older-stories-in-the-spotlight"]}
created2016-09-03 02:34:48
last_update2016-09-03 02:34:48
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length918
author_reputation6,928,229,020,018
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,475
net_rshares0
@eatgrits ·
TEAM AMERICA!!!.........
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGQaH3-LK54
properties (22)
authoreatgrits
permlinkre-adamt-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t033148619z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"image":["https://img.youtube.com/vi/MGQaH3-LK54/0.jpg"],"links":["https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGQaH3-LK54"]}
created2016-09-03 03:31:51
last_update2016-09-03 03:31:51
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length68
author_reputation122,146,068,061
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,856
net_rshares0
@anomaly ·
"...Every block that an account is at 100% vote power is lost potential. The goal is to get as many accounts under 100% vote power at all times. This should lead to rewards being spread out due to the lack of consensus among whales as to what defines quality content..."

In other words, don't blame the developers for trying to balance the powers, they had to change the X votes per day because some of the whales weren't voting enough (or barely at all apparently).

**Dear Developers**:  I understand your motivation for wanting to lower the ceiling, but I think what you really need to do is just convince more whales to vote more often.  An alternative would be to build into Steem an auto-correcting protocol which could offset the lack of votes by temporarily upping the effect of all votes by whatever the difference is for any given block.  It might not do anything for diversity, but at least it would end the senseless waste the potential steem that could be produced but isn't because of people leaving their accounts sitting at 100% voting power all day.

**Dear Whales**:  Please don't let this change to the number of votes per day set you back from voting.  As was already said, you can vote as many times as you want.  There aren't any real penalties for voting more than the optimum number of times, however there is an overall penalty to the community as a whole when you don't vote at all (less steem is produced on the blockchain).  And please keep in mind that your voting power should never be at 100%.  That statistic is psychologically backwards because when you have 100% voting power what it really means is that you've only accomplished 0% of your voting work for the day.  And when whales don't vote the entire community suffers from it (literally, it's built-into the blockchain).  So please keep voting, in fact, vote more often.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authoranomaly
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t040934033z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 04:09:33
last_update2016-09-03 04:09:33
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,860
author_reputation29,354,604,876,030
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,167
net_rshares3,489,023,854
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@psychonaut ·
"due to the lack of consensus among whales as to what defines quality content..."

Seems to me that's a false assumption..
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-anomaly-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t091053200z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 09:10:54
last_update2016-09-03 09:10:54
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length122
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,231
net_rshares3,605,569,170
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@ash ·
$0.82
what about:

* Marketplace
* Notifications
* Mobile App
πŸ‘  , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorash
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194406834z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:44:06
last_update2016-09-02 19:44:06
depth1
children6
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.683 HBD
curator_payout_value0.133 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length55
author_reputation286,803,743,324,398
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,542
net_rshares1,533,066,604,829
author_curate_reward""
vote details (7)
@jesta · (edited)
The list you posted is mostly steemit.com features, not steem features :)
properties (22)
authorjesta
permlinkre-ash-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195409880z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:54:09
last_update2016-09-02 19:55:30
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length73
author_reputation140,605,453,893,072
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,665
net_rshares0
@ned ·
There are several mobile apps already released or in development for Steem!

Steemit Inc's plans have been evolving as we get our vision correct for approaching sign ups, identities, marketplace, bounty system, promoted content and the rest of the social blockchain stack.  We'll be releasing a more in depth roadmap in the near future.
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authorned
permlinkre-ash-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t201648155z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:16:48
last_update2016-09-02 20:16:48
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length336
author_reputation94,449,026,656,258
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,953
net_rshares62,293,263,457
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@ash ·
$0.75
would you trust a random, non audited non steemit checked app with your keys? 

I wouldn't even give them my posting key
πŸ‘  , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorash
permlinkre-ned-re-ash-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t202057863z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:20:57
last_update2016-09-02 20:20:57
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.570 HBD
curator_payout_value0.180 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length120
author_reputation286,803,743,324,398
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,993
net_rshares1,435,261,144,108
author_curate_reward""
vote details (8)
@noisy ·
$2.55
> Marketplace

IMO, escrow is a step into this direction. Right? :)
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authornoisy
permlinkre-ash-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195312604z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:53:12
last_update2016-09-02 19:53:12
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.918 HBD
curator_payout_value0.635 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length67
author_reputation59,974,373,499,600
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,654
net_rshares3,394,314,059,398
author_curate_reward""
vote details (11)
@smooth ·
It's 90% of the way there. You can just make a post describing the item for sale in an appropriate category and you have a marketplace.
properties (22)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-noisy-re-ash-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t214559600z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:46:00
last_update2016-09-02 21:46:00
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length135
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,000
net_rshares0
@bacchist ·
$3.66
>Target Votes of 5 per Day instead of 40

>We are changing the target number of votes per day from 40 to 5 so that more people keep their voting power below 100%. The purpose of this change is to rebalance power toward normal users and away from bots. You can still vote as often as you like, this change merely impacts the speed at which voting power is consumed.

This change is ridiculous. Don't you think this is something that should have been debated openly first?
πŸ‘  , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorbacchist
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195654451z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:56:57
last_update2016-09-02 19:56:57
depth1
children17
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value2.829 HBD
curator_payout_value0.826 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length470
author_reputation85,392,357,715,964
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,715
net_rshares4,318,325,262,443
author_curate_reward""
vote details (6)
@jesta ·
$0.68
I'd genuinely like to know why you think it's ridiculous. Personally I don't mind that the power of my votes will be decreased the more I vote. Right now the current system is a little silly IMHO, I vote like 20-30 times a day and never go below 95% voting power.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorjesta
permlinkre-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t200530975z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:05:30
last_update2016-09-02 20:05:30
depth2
children5
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.531 HBD
curator_payout_value0.153 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length263
author_reputation140,605,453,893,072
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,831
net_rshares1,277,227,558,064
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@razvanelulmarin ·
what? i'm under 80% at the end of most days...
properties (22)
authorrazvanelulmarin
permlinkre-jesta-re-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t212531011z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:25:45
last_update2016-09-02 21:25:45
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length46
author_reputation176,753,416,199,361
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,751
net_rshares0
@steemychicken1 ·
that 5 rule voting counts only when voting at 100% power??
properties (22)
authorsteemychicken1
permlinkre-jesta-re-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220736057z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:07:42
last_update2016-09-02 22:07:42
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length58
author_reputation1,641,136,985,256,015
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,206
net_rshares0
@liondani ·
Are we not debating right now? Do we need more than a week debating?
properties (22)
authorliondani
permlinkre-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t031804381z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:18:03
last_update2016-09-03 03:18:03
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length68
author_reputation95,095,146,236,111
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,764
net_rshares0
@lukestokes ·
> Don't you think this is something that should have been debated openly first?

That's what this post is about. Please note the big **Feedback Wanted** header. Nothing has been deployed yet. I'm tempted to add a snarky comment about pitchforks, but alas, I have refrained. ;)
properties (22)
authorlukestokes
permlinkre-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t203052284z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:30:51
last_update2016-09-02 20:30:51
depth2
children6
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length276
author_reputation556,640,380,599,219
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,125
net_rshares0
@bacchist ·
It's a release candidate....
properties (22)
authorbacchist
permlinkre-lukestokes-re-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t215329606z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:53:33
last_update2016-09-02 21:53:33
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length28
author_reputation85,392,357,715,964
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,079
net_rshares0
@smooth ·
$0.03
Especially given this:

> Publish Release Candidate (Today)
> Confirm Release in one week (9/9/2016)

Seems quite clear this is an opportunity for discussion. Steemit is doing on a good job on this one, let's acknowledge that.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-lukestokes-re-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t214904100z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:49:06
last_update2016-09-02 21:49:06
depth3
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.027 HBD
curator_payout_value0.004 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length226
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,037
net_rshares79,289,774,007
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@noisy ·
$0.52
if this mean, that my vote (if I vote once per day) will be worth 8 times more, then this is great to show users, that they have greater impact! :)
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authornoisy
permlinkre-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195917649z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:59:18
last_update2016-09-02 19:59:18
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.388 HBD
curator_payout_value0.128 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length147
author_reputation59,974,373,499,600
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,751
net_rshares1,015,898,408,099
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@razvanelulmarin · (edited)
There are two ways to answer this: Does someone who owns over 50% of the power in a company should ask the community anything? On the the one hand: no. 
But on steemit, as we feel are PART of what's happening here - a thing I never felt on FB + I never thought that Zuckerberg should ask me anything - it seems that it will only further alienate the core users [ basically all the people commenting here with 58+ rep ]. Not necessarily because the changes are bad but because we are not listened...
YET!! This is a pre-release and a chance to voice our concerns. So maybe we will be listened to and taken in considerations...
properties (22)
authorrazvanelulmarin
permlinkre-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220346419z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:04:03
last_update2016-09-02 22:05:27
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length625
author_reputation176,753,416,199,361
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,174
net_rshares0
@sigmajin · (edited)
$0.20
Of course they want an open debate.  Thats why they put this issue at the very top of the list of changes.

If they were trying to sneak it though without an open debate, they would have put it at the very bottom, under the heading "bug fixes" or someth... oh hey wait a second.
πŸ‘  , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorsigmajin
permlinkre-bacchist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t165445704z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 16:54:39
last_update2016-09-03 16:57:21
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.199 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length278
author_reputation35,847,511,233,614
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,113,171
net_rshares1,018,366,344,571
author_curate_reward""
vote details (7)
@bhavnapatel68 ·
Why shouldwe eleminate the power of vote per day. What happens for people like me who do not blog that often? And I enjoy reading and upvoting the articles I like. It is something that I enjoy as well as that generates me pennies...lol. I prefer to keep my voting ability free and not changed.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorbhavnapatel68
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160904t141821506z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-04 14:18:24
last_update2016-09-04 14:18:24
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length293
author_reputation4,976,629,087,476
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,122,812
net_rshares3,230,383,186
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@btcbtcbtc20155 ·
New rules is correcting some of the behavior problems and hope the next releases will target more.
properties (22)
authorbtcbtcbtc20155
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t223518181z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:35:12
last_update2016-09-02 22:35:12
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length98
author_reputation3,556,221,968,131
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,557
net_rshares0
@burnin ·
# [What is the Target Votes 5 per Day change, anyway?](https://steemit.com/steem/@burnin/what-is-the-target-votes-5-per-day-change-anyway)

I analyzed the changes in the code reached some conclusions [here](https://steemit.com/steem/@burnin/what-is-the-target-votes-5-per-day-change-anyway).  

*TL;DR: As far as I can tell, effectively what this does is have each vote weight 10x as much as previously did (and correspondly use 10x as much Voting Power)*
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorburnin
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t215203661z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@burnin/what-is-the-target-votes-5-per-day-change-anyway"]}
created2016-09-02 21:52:03
last_update2016-09-02 21:52:03
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length455
author_reputation15,792,464,317,401
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,067
net_rshares4,654,012,800
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@carlidos ·
$0.79
Hmm, what is going on @ned and @dantheman? these changes have nothing to do with what steemit which is the main issue at the moment,  from 40 to 5 votes every 24 hours seems as though you are doing the opposite of what the community has been asking. Less content being noticed because every one is going to reserve their voting power.  Is it just me or am I getting these updates wrong? every time a system or business changes things they arn't actually changing anything that the community wants, but some random crap update. Again correct me if I am getting it wrong.  What does this do to prevent whale trails and same content being on the trending page?
πŸ‘  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorcarlidos
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t205636747z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned","dantheman"]}
created2016-09-02 20:56:36
last_update2016-09-02 20:56:36
depth1
children14
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.658 HBD
curator_payout_value0.132 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length657
author_reputation12,523,058,510,954
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,410
net_rshares1,433,285,933,614
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@ned · (edited)
$0.66
Essentially the 40 to 5 change increases the degree of competition between voters and therefore it should reduce whale trails.  It may not be the only solution possible. We have some other ideas on the table, such as removing voting power from Stake that is powering down, as well as adding delegated voting pools and peer-to-peer vote delegation.  With each proposed solution there are potential drawbacks, or the community may decide it's not what is wanted, but we are actively working to find these solutions and upgrade user experience.
πŸ‘  , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorned
permlinkre-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t211119406z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:11:18
last_update2016-09-02 21:12:00
depth2
children13
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.495 HBD
curator_payout_value0.161 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length541
author_reputation94,449,026,656,258
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,592
net_rshares1,233,726,912,576
author_curate_reward""
vote details (6)
@akareyon · (edited)
$0.03
I'll just join the choir and say that as a redditor, I never stopped upvoting on comments like I used to and I think the reduction is a bad idea for all the other reasons already given, but I understand your reasons for trying and just hope the experiment will go as well as the 12h one - and be reverted in a few weeks :) 

This however, is good news, may the gods smile upon you: 

> as well as adding delegated voting pools and peer-to-peer vote delegation

Yay! They will be weighted, right? Like, I can delegate 10% of my power to a user I trust, 5% to another one and use the rest for myself...?

---

Excuse the hijacking: have you thought about adding a text field to the database for each user which can be edited indefinitely and be (ab)used as "Profile Page" (Γ  la MySpace) or index ("my best posts"), for example?

---

//edit: the slider works on steemit.com! I take everything back, leave it at 5. Perfect.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorakareyon
permlinkre-ned-re-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t215810430z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:58:06
last_update2016-09-02 23:29:03
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.024 HBD
curator_payout_value0.007 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length920
author_reputation6,770,831,834,202
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,123
net_rshares77,634,044,117
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@carlidos · (edited)
Thanks for the response how about. Adding SP to over 60 rep members from the account @steemit  to increase curation and spread of good content. I see @steemit always sending SP to your pals. Why not give the community more spending power of course the amount being sent can't be powerd down ever.  But gives the community as a whole to grow the site not just a handfull of big whales controlling the content.  Might not sound like capitalism but the blockchain should be it's own ism "blockchainism" sounds about right.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorcarlidos
permlinkre-ned-re-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t213249002z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["steemit"]}
created2016-09-02 21:32:48
last_update2016-09-02 21:33:42
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length519
author_reputation12,523,058,510,954
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,849
net_rshares7,635,279,356
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@cryptogee ·
> We have some other ideas on the table, such as removing voting power from Stake that is powering down

Interesting, I assumed that voting power would reduce accordingly as you're powering down anyway?

*Cg*
properties (22)
authorcryptogee
permlinkre-ned-re-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220036429z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:00:42
last_update2016-09-02 22:00:42
depth3
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length208
author_reputation419,387,439,147,428
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,150
net_rshares0
@gomeravibz · (edited)
Hello @ned well this " removing voting power from Stake that is powering down " i would totally agree with. I have been here since almost one month !! i hold all of my investment in Steem Power. I do this primarily  i believe that someone who commits to the concept of Steemit at 100 percent and is here to give full support to the site would do this. When people power down its like saying im ready to step outside and get some air, which is their choice, but those of us who are here for the long run, who have invested large amounts of money to have steem power which gives them natural curation advantages that it brings are deserved by this new method of voting. It will just further intensify the swarming to the trending posts which lets face it are easy to spot, even when you are not a bot !!
properties (22)
authorgomeravibz
permlinkre-ned-re-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t032428874z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned"]}
created2016-09-03 03:24:27
last_update2016-09-03 03:30:09
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length801
author_reputation53,218,725,520,811
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,801
net_rshares0
@gomeravibz · (edited)
for instance i just wanted to upvote your comment which i am happy to read. I did it at ten percent and .......well nothing !! So what do  i do now remove my vote and repeat with increased percentage?? seems complicated no ? Does not feel right to me this !!  But i did upvote you, but seemingly no reward !! ( sorry !
properties (22)
authorgomeravibz
permlinkre-ned-re-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t032749749z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:27:51
last_update2016-09-03 03:29:09
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length318
author_reputation53,218,725,520,811
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,820
net_rshares0
@jako · (edited)
I'm quite confident that if the outcome of this new feature will not serve the steemit purpose (reducing the influence of bots, rewarding the long tail of content), you'll keep tweaking it, as you have done so far and as any entrepreneurs do.

Here is my little proposition though: <b>Discrete target vote distribution</b>. As the voting power of minions has much less impact than the one of whales, as the majority of users are minions and as you need to maintain the activity of the minions (who are your early adopters):

<b>I think adapting the target vote (and/or the regeneration days) according to the steem power of each users could contribute to a good equilibrium without arming the user engagement (example of target vote distribution: 40 for minions, 30 for bigfishs, 10 for orcas,  5 for whales)</b> It may not contribute to dimish drastically the influence of bots as your initial feature will, though
properties (22)
authorjako
permlinkre-ned-re-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t122605703z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 12:26:09
last_update2016-09-03 12:31:33
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length915
author_reputation6,250,393,996,177
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,110,458
net_rshares0
@psychonaut ·
@ned here's what I don't get.

If I understand it right, at the moment whales and others can vote 40 times at full or nearly full voting power.

Yet most new authors (like me) go completely unnoticed..

If the amount of votes that can be cast at full power drops to a measly 5, what incentive does a whale (essentially the only way to start breaking through) have, wasting 1 out of 5 precious votes on a nobody?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-ned-re-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t090419500z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned"]}
created2016-09-03 09:04:21
last_update2016-09-03 09:04:21
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length411
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,181
net_rshares2,495,694,596
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@sigmajin · (edited)
$0.03
Maybe just me.  But personally, my user experience would be really really improved if there weren't a scheme to change who can vote and how every single week.  I actually had a really big deal set up for steem that went to XMR instead after the whole hitler-post voting thing came out.

Just this one guy.

If the goal is really to decentralize whale influence, why not just do it the obvious way.  Take ninja-mined vests (ie, any vests mined when mining was open but not really open) out of play for curation (after all, thats not why the ninja mine was there in the first place, it was to raise money for the platform).  This would also stop PD cashouts, or at least slow them down, because whales would have to recycle their SP back into vests in order to get their curation powers back.   It wouldn't effect investors.  

It will definitely not reduce whaletrials because most of the whales have other accounts they can bring into play if they run out of votes, or don't cast their full 40 in the first place.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorsigmajin
permlinkre-ned-re-carlidos-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t153907001z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 15:39:00
last_update2016-09-03 15:43:45
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.031 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,013
author_reputation35,847,511,233,614
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,112,338
net_rshares79,984,614,609
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@cryptohead · (edited)
I would like to see a more decentralized and fair POW queue.
Right now, the queue is dominated by one or two individuals, that prevent others contributing CPU mining  to get their reward. 
Here's my initial complain: https://steemit.com/tag/@cryptohead/steem-mining-queue-dominated-by-the-rabbit-servers
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorcryptohead
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t130030034z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/tag/@cryptohead/steem-mining-queue-dominated-by-the-rabbit-servers"]}
created2016-09-03 13:00:27
last_update2016-09-03 13:02:03
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length303
author_reputation607,929,583,052
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,110,732
net_rshares561,836,389
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@cryptos ·
$0.48
Pelase elaborate more on the: "Target Votes of 5 per Day instead of 40" change...
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorcryptos
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194956874z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:50:00
last_update2016-09-02 19:50:00
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.384 HBD
curator_payout_value0.091 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length81
author_reputation46,134,267,491,665
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,607
net_rshares947,273,850,002
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@dana-edwards ·
We have been waiting for this hard fork for a really long time. I've been watching it's development over Github. Good job.

Now let's discuss the next hardfork and the idea Dan put forward to make life harder for trolls and stalkers?
properties (22)
authordana-edwards
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t201335170z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:13:33
last_update2016-09-02 20:13:33
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length233
author_reputation353,623,611,191,427
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,929
net_rshares0
@dantheman ·
$1.54
This is a backend update, no changes to steemit.com at this time.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authordantheman
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194440142z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:44:39
last_update2016-09-02 19:44:39
depth1
children11
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.534 HBD
curator_payout_value0.006 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length65
author_reputation240,292,002,602,347
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,554
net_rshares2,499,729,742,265
author_curate_reward""
vote details (12)
@cryptos ·
What has happened with the Feed tab, seems to have disappeared?
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorcryptos
permlinkre-dantheman-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195452925z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:54:57
last_update2016-09-02 19:54:57
depth2
children4
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length63
author_reputation46,134,267,491,665
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,676
net_rshares183,212,463
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@ash ·
$0.54
it's Home now check the bookmarks to the left
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorash
permlinkre-cryptos-re-dantheman-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t202800237z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:28:00
last_update2016-09-02 20:28:00
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.404 HBD
curator_payout_value0.133 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length45
author_reputation286,803,743,324,398
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,087
net_rshares1,110,934,251,835
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@noisy ·
$0.52
link [is still working](https://steemit.com/@noisy/feed), but you are right. It is not longer there!
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authornoisy
permlinkre-cryptos-re-dantheman-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195717251z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/@noisy/feed"]}
created2016-09-02 19:57:18
last_update2016-09-02 19:57:18
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.388 HBD
curator_payout_value0.128 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length100
author_reputation59,974,373,499,600
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,719
net_rshares1,015,881,778,003
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@mahekg ·
What about rating system? Do you think it's fair?
Are you aware of groups on steemit.chat that are flagging good people and post because they are jealous?
Can you do something about that?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormahekg
permlinkre-dantheman-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194838381z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:48:39
last_update2016-09-02 19:48:39
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length187
author_reputation2,470,250,819,178
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,597
net_rshares12,815,068,902
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@radoslaw · (edited)
$0.02
@mahekg, give me several hours, please. I have almost finished a draft of proposal related to this topic.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorradoslaw
permlinkre-mahekg-re-dantheman-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t180142691z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["mahekg"]}
created2016-09-02 20:01:42
last_update2016-09-02 20:01:54
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.020 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length105
author_reputation750,186,072,801
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,791
net_rshares51,085,662,624
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@psychonaut ·
The rules sure are getting complicated!
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-dantheman-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195614500z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:56:15
last_update2016-09-02 19:56:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length39
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,696
net_rshares3,534,746,298
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@radoslaw ·
Hi Dan, 
it is nice to see these changes. 
Talking about 'steemit.com', I could not find a preferred way to make a proposal for it. Could you please advice me on this? I believe there might be an important feature improvement needed.

For now I plan to post it today or tomorrow on Steemit with #steem #steemit tags if you don't mind.
I guess you are busy but if you would like to hear more, share your opinion etc., I am available on Steemit chat :)
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorradoslaw
permlinkre-dantheman-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t180018259z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem","steemit"]}
created2016-09-02 20:00:18
last_update2016-09-02 20:00:18
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length450
author_reputation750,186,072,801
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,772
net_rshares21,545,201,918
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@noisy ·
$0.52
#steem #steemit tag are overused by others, so this will be extremely difficult to find any proposal there.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authornoisy
permlinkre-radoslaw-re-dantheman-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t200602482z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem","steemit"]}
created2016-09-02 20:06:03
last_update2016-09-02 20:06:03
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.388 HBD
curator_payout_value0.128 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length107
author_reputation59,974,373,499,600
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,837
net_rshares1,016,827,582,739
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@discernente ·
Good to know that the thing is improving.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authordiscernente
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t193809123z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:38:09
last_update2016-09-02 19:38:09
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length41
author_reputation569,779,453,117,908
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,470
net_rshares79,990,758
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@donkeypong · (edited)
$140.18
## I strongly oppose the "5 votes a day" target. 

I thought one of the greatest changes to be implemented so far was when that target INCREASED. People have not been so stressed in the last month or two about curation rewards; they just vote for what they like and have fun. 

I don't think Steemit will be FUN anymore if there is an expected target of 5 votes per day. People will spend much less time on the site. They will vote for predictably popular content. And we will be right back where we were a couple of months ago. 

No, it will be worse than that. Because 20 votes a day used to stress people out. 5 votes a day? NO ONE can do any real curation under that scheme.

As an individual and an established author, the 5 votes a day could be great for me. If we go back to the days when everybody upvoted the same posts, then maybe I'd get all those votes again. I could quit my job and write for Steemit full time. 

And we'd go back to the days when emerging authors and artists got far fewer votes and rewards. 

As far as curation and voting bots, they are being used for very good purposes also. Rather than turning our tails and running away from them, why don't we use them for the greater good? I think the mega-whales' curation teams are doing a far better job than ever before at redistributing rewards; I make nothing from being involved in that effort, but I think it is working quite well. Give the vote sliders and the voting bots more time; Steemit's front page is finally diversifying and newer people are getting rewards like never before. 

One more thing: Redistribution of Steemit's resources from big whale accounts to the masses MUST be one of our top priorities. How does this help? I understand that big whale accounts may make less on curation rewards, but I think few of them are concerned with this anymore; they're trying to channel their votes to worthy posters. They have recognized that their big stakes will be worth nothing unless we make this thing succeed.

Under this scheme, the big whales will need to sell the max on exchanges every week and other people buy their Steem for any real redistribution to occur. That will hold down the price and our competitors will zoom right by us. 

Steem Team, I understand you are trying to solve real problems with these tweaks. I don't normally comment on them because I feel that Steemit is good enough that there is some margin for error with these back-end decisions. But this is far, far too severe a change for the platform to absorb.

## If I am wrong, then I'd love to hear that from the community, and I am open to learning from other views. Give us time for this discussion, please, before forcing through such a change. Until then, I oppose this change.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and 81 others
πŸ‘Ž  
properties (23)
authordonkeypong
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t211609578z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:16:27
last_update2016-09-02 21:19:45
depth1
children106
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value125.295 HBD
curator_payout_value14.888 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,749
author_reputation431,667,636,679,304
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,660
net_rshares42,304,792,392,028
author_curate_reward""
vote details (146)
@acidyo ·
As someone who is very active on Steemit, I fully agree with this post. 
Even though I haven't usually stressed all that much about my voting power and curation rewards since my SP is pretty low, I have instead put a lot of time in to welcome new users with votes and comments as much as I could. This new change seems to counter my activity and tell me to leave Steemit cause my continuous tries to be welcoming and helpful to legit new users to the platform will be limited to 5 users per day, sort of.

>People have not been so stressed in the last month or two about curation rewards

True and this was with vacation for 2 weeks for me which got my voting power above 50% for the first time in months.

>As far as curation and voting bots, they are being used for very good purposes also. Rather than turning our tails and running away from them, why don't we use them for the greater good?

If this change is really just to get rid of bots, I think over time its something that will fix itself and shouldn't be altered this way. Like people used to say, in decentralization there is both those that want to use it for the greater good, and those who just want to see the world burn. But over time, like the use of bitcoin, the greater use of it will outweigh the evil use.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authoracidyo
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t225403935z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:54:03
last_update2016-09-02 22:54:03
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,277
author_reputation3,360,608,773,029,059
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,783
net_rshares38,348,578,159
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@alyssas ·
$0.05
I assume flag votes will count in the five? So will this mean people will be reluctant to flag problematic content?
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authoralyssas
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t010724056z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:07:27
last_update2016-09-03 01:07:27
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.042 HBD
curator_payout_value0.011 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length115
author_reputation9,045,555,847,809
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,931
net_rshares129,297,955,002
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@arcaneinfo ·
Speak for yourself in all aspects please! I have not gotten any exposure let alone whale votes, EVER. You can look at my post I GTD I have one at-least worthy of making decent money but guess what? No. I love putting energy into something I gain energy from so to be real i'm not complaining, just would think one-time I could have a financial prestige on this Great Platform! Cheers I respectfully disagree.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorarcaneinfo
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t014142068z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:41:45
last_update2016-09-03 01:41:45
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length408
author_reputation14,902,978,467,172
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,145
net_rshares5,648,857,559
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@gomeravibz ·
well i hear what you are saying. Wow i went to see your stuff, alot of good posts ( 1500 posts in all !!! ) it seems to me. you have a lot of followers but the rewards yes are not there. A little like my experience i must say. I have purposefully invested in steem power as i saw it as the key ingredient to this pie. But now it seems it means less than owning lots of SBD,S which lets face it you only truly get if you receive large author rewards. Steem power was supposed to be the safe option and for this it takes 2 years to power it down to steem tokens or dollars. !! So this just enriches the authors and takes from what i,d call the curating  real hard money investors to this site which by the way  pay the  sollars to the authors.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorgomeravibz
permlinkre-arcaneinfo-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t030002728z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:00:06
last_update2016-09-03 03:00:06
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length741
author_reputation53,218,725,520,811
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,644
net_rshares5,575,821,963
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@ats-david ·
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote. I would like to quote from the whitepaper.  

>#### Value is in the Links

>The Internet would lose the vast majority of its value if all links among content were
removed. It is the relationship among web pages that allows Google to identify the best
apple pie recipe among the 16 million results. Without the links the only information
Google would have is word frequency.

>Links can take many forms and have adapted over time. Every time a user votes on content
in a social network they add a link between themselves and the content. This in turn links
the consumer to the producer through the content. The more links a network has the more
valuable the information becomes. It is the relative and intentional connectedness of
information that gives it value.

>A social network can maximize the value extracted from a set of content by maximizing the
quantity and quality of links. Curating content is expensive and time consuming while being
near impossible for computers to perform in the absence of links. Steem rewards users who
are among the first to find and link to new content.

>By incentivising curation the Steem network is able to use automated algorithms to extract
the most valuable information from a massive amount of content.

Limiting the voting (because most users likely either won't be using the slider or won't even have one) will limit the number of links being generated. And I don't see why users would not be incentivized to simply curate *their own content* for the new, higher maximum reward. 

Or, we may just end up with a bunch of regular users with no voting power to actually give rewards, which would reduce the incentive to create quality posts in the first place.

If there is a problem with bots, then do something that can fix the bot problem. Add captcha-type recognition software to stop or reduce bots - if that's even the goal. Don't make the curation system more complex for human users and reduce incentives to curate an increasing amount of quality content. 

### Less links = less value for the platform.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorats-david
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t043339731z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 04:33:39
last_update2016-09-03 04:33:39
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,101
author_reputation324,017,334,201,433
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,382
net_rshares3,349,373,124
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@benjojo ·
$0.10
5 per day is the wrong way I think.....i like to upvote comments a lot to express agreement/approval or thanks or simply to help distribution of Steem to those who are engaging and making an effort with Steemit. in addition to normal curation of posts I like, that's a lot of votes. If this change is to go ahead, the issue of showing approval or enabling low SP holders the ability to distribute rewards or views is a must.  Engagement and building community is everything....we need the tools to be able to communicate effectively with each other.  For too many, the experience on Steemit can feel worse than Reddit and Facebook when the impact of their engagement is minimal or they get hardly anything for their content, (and we all know it's not always a question of quality) because they have higher expectations. Encourage more engagement, not less......though I appreciate you are trying to make it harder for bots.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorbenjojo
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t004035618z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 00:40:36
last_update2016-09-03 00:40:36
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.076 HBD
curator_payout_value0.024 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length923
author_reputation120,749,050,383,122
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,750
net_rshares236,833,211,121
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@quinneaker ·
$0.73
Comments are one of the mot valuable parts of a good post. There is already WAY TO LITTLE incentive to UPvote comments because there is not much profit in the UPvoter, this only makes even LESS incentive for UPvoting comments. This is not good because it will reduce the motivation for people to make VALUABLE comments. 
How do such smart people with such access to opinions make such decisions????
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authorquinneaker
permlinkre-benjojo-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t061200323z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 06:12:00
last_update2016-09-03 06:12:00
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.547 HBD
curator_payout_value0.180 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length398
author_reputation326,681,856,591,722
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,166
net_rshares1,339,541,057,966
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@btc-dialog ·
Technically you could just mis-understand the new functionality. 
- Aside from the fact that you get 5 votes you also have the ability to select a %-age. So you can chop up your 5 votes into 20, by using something like 20% on each vote
- normal users probably vote like 5 times a day. I am sure the team had a reason to make this 5 and not 7 or 10.
- due to the %-ages we can vote much more deliberately and give one single post up to 20% of all of our voting power and also less than 1% if we so choose to.
properties (22)
authorbtc-dialog
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t034336290z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:43:36
last_update2016-09-03 03:43:36
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length507
author_reputation2,142,501,891,057
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,957
net_rshares0
@burnin ·
$0.10
[Check out my analysis.](https://steemit.com/steem/@burnin/what-is-the-target-votes-5-per-day-change-anyway) I agree this is bad and doesn't seem to have much effect.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorburnin
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221853324z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@burnin/what-is-the-target-votes-5-per-day-change-anyway"]}
created2016-09-02 22:18:54
last_update2016-09-02 22:18:54
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.072 HBD
curator_payout_value0.023 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length166
author_reputation15,792,464,317,401
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,359
net_rshares227,092,187,761
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@clevecross ·
$4.26
I agree.... 5 a day without significant recharge boost..... Seems it will hurt. Even just hearing 5 a day will cause some not to do more, even at 40 would see in comments "I would upvote but....."
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorclevecross
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t214415746z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:44:15
last_update2016-09-02 21:44:15
depth2
children7
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value3.907 HBD
curator_payout_value0.349 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length196
author_reputation7,635,074,529,912
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,978
net_rshares4,768,937,686,443
author_curate_reward""
vote details (18)
@knozaki2015 ·
$1.77
This is insane! 5 Votes is nothing...
πŸ‘  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorknozaki2015
permlinkre-clevecross-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t214700489z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:47:42
last_update2016-09-02 21:47:42
depth3
children6
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.327 HBD
curator_payout_value0.440 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length37
author_reputation1,102,353,973,346,032
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,018
net_rshares2,622,207,625,622
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@cryptogee ·
$5.08
I must say I agree with @donkeypong on this, it just feels like we have turned a corner with the diversity of content on the site, and this tweak threatens that. I can't see how reducing the influence of whale votes whilst hardly increasing the influence of mass-minnow votes, gets to the root of the problem.

Surely we should be looking at increasing the voting influence of new users who have proven themselves as reputable accounts.

Hopefully this change won't set us back to vote bandwagoning and a top heavy trending page.

*Cg*
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorcryptogee
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t215759293z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["donkeypong"]}
created2016-09-02 21:58:06
last_update2016-09-02 21:58:06
depth2
children6
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value3.973 HBD
curator_payout_value1.102 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length535
author_reputation419,387,439,147,428
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,121
net_rshares5,340,431,242,319
author_curate_reward""
vote details (22)
@clevecross ·
Agree with you very much about increasing new user reputable voting, and happy to hear it is something wanted. Has seemed a lot like a game lately.... Really can vote for almost anything without reading it and be assured it will trend of by a certain author.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorclevecross
permlinkre-cryptogee-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220317907z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:03:18
last_update2016-09-02 22:03:18
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length258
author_reputation7,635,074,529,912
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,168
net_rshares2,862,708,507
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@gomeravibz ·
yes if people are limited to just 5 votes a day, they will only vote on authors that i think by now we all know the names in a swarming to the  best possible curation rewards. So this will infact i feel further damage the chances of most importantly new unknown authors and  certainly us authors who just dont seem to be able to be seen at all and get little support. I would say we need more votes but reduce the power of the votes to allow people to take a risk on " unpopular " posts and so this would encourage the spreading of wealth to all and not just focus still more the power of steem to the fastest horses on the track ! For me this could be a serious problem personally as i have already explained above. But for new hopeful users..... well they just won't i feel get in the game and just sit on the sidelines as the Steemit stars take even more money from their posts .............
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorgomeravibz
permlinkre-cryptogee-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t023500835z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 02:35:00
last_update2016-09-03 02:35:00
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length894
author_reputation53,218,725,520,811
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,478
net_rshares2,862,708,507
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@quinneaker ·
I also for the most part agree with @donkeyong
On top of that one of the main problems we have is that there are a small group of people who get A LOT For their posts because people bet on the post making money. Most people are using their vote to get curation reward and don't even read the posts....Lame.
What's even potentially worse isn't hat there is a already little incentive for UPvoting comments and this would make it even less...
So now there is MORE incentive to just UPvote the big boys posts to get curation rewards and LESS incentive to UPvote quality posts that might not be big earners and even less incentive to UPvote comment so. 
We need NEW users to be valued to grow the platform and we need comments to bring depth to already wuality posts. 
If there is little to no value for making in depth comment Then they willll be les and less. Then we have a shallow and fickle platform with bots and money hogs...
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorquinneaker
permlinkre-cryptogee-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t080005764z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["donkeyong"]}
created2016-09-03 08:00:06
last_update2016-09-03 08:00:06
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length928
author_reputation326,681,856,591,722
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,756
net_rshares2,914,431,995
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@cynetyc ·
Ok that was a huge reply  but I agree olso . I  opose 5 votes a day olso.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorcynetyc
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t211758573z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 21:18:00
last_update2016-09-03 21:18:00
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length73
author_reputation108,708,138,206,157
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,115,814
net_rshares401,597,958
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@dennygalindo · (edited)
The escrow sounds interesting but I am also worried about curation. Again it seems like these fixes always 1) have an inordinate fear of bots and 2) address the whales usability concerns first. 


**The whales are important but they need to think like minnow to make the platform better. Maybe they need a Minnow focus group.**
properties (22)
authordennygalindo
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t012721674z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:27:21
last_update2016-09-03 02:38:54
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length327
author_reputation6,552,498,469,686
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,070
net_rshares0
@dwinblood ·
Both @klye and @bacchist have each done exposes where they found accounts that seemed to come out of nowhere to have every post those accounts made up voted thousands of dollars even when using stock photos they didn't credit.     So five votes would likely not stop this, but it might make them ONLY vote for their sock puppets.     This is a concerning loophole that it seems is being exploited.   Have someone create a sock puppet account, very powerful whales up vote it.   Instant thousands of dollars.    I don't know how to fight this.    Yet it seems like 5 votes won't stop this.   I'm not 100% yet how this will help.    I tentatively am in agreement with you @donkeypong though I do need to watch and see how it actually plays out.   Good thing about beta, they can try it out.   If it doesn't work they can roll it back or try something different.
properties (22)
authordwinblood
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t164857671z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["klye","bacchist","donkeypong"]}
created2016-09-03 16:48:51
last_update2016-09-03 16:48:51
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length859
author_reputation383,232,067,634,988
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,113,118
net_rshares0
@elyaque ·
Agree 100% with you !
properties (22)
authorelyaque
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t234625693z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 23:46:27
last_update2016-09-02 23:46:27
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length21
author_reputation109,256,325,621,350
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,318
net_rshares0
@ervin-lemark ·
You are not wrong. You are absolutely right! 

When I vote, I vote because I like the post, the comment or want to encourage the author.  

## I don' count the votes. I don't calculate the percentages or the voting power. I just VOTE!
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authorervin-lemark
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t224231123z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:43:00
last_update2016-09-02 22:43:00
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length234
author_reputation473,597,055,330,320
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,647
net_rshares17,054,870,747
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@dennygalindo ·
You can't even see your voting power without going to steemd.
properties (22)
authordennygalindo
permlinkre-ervin-lemark-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t023500074z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 02:35:00
last_update2016-09-03 02:35:00
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length61
author_reputation6,552,498,469,686
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,477
net_rshares0
@kus-knee ·
That describes me exactly.
properties (22)
authorkus-knee
permlinkre-ervin-lemark-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t051934759z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 05:19:36
last_update2016-09-03 05:19:36
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length26
author_reputation307,925,583,264,282
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,721
net_rshares0
@furion ·
$0.54
The system is getting more complex every day. Now people need to think about how many times they already voted today, and instead of voting being a binary choice, it is a 100th degree choice.

Bots will just continue voting with 12.5% vote percentage, while regular users get hurt in UX.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorfurion
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t230935059z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 23:09:33
last_update2016-09-02 23:09:33
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.419 HBD
curator_payout_value0.121 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length287
author_reputation116,503,940,714,958
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,953
net_rshares1,054,444,435,955
author_curate_reward""
vote details (8)
@gregory-f ·
Do we really want to discourage active users from actively using the platform? It's one thing to try to penalize bot abuse, (but they will just rewrite the code) it's another thing to discourage actively using steemit. People are upset that their posts only get a few votes now, it will be much worse when they start getting no votes on every post.

And that will be the result. Vast numbers of posts with no votes. Followed quickly by vast numbers of formally active users with abandoned accounts. I cannot think of any single change that will more quickly kill steemit than this one.
properties (22)
authorgregory-f
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t200456536z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 20:04:57
last_update2016-09-03 20:04:57
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length585
author_reputation183,274,495,010,368
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,115,163
net_rshares0
@hanshotfirst ·
I think the #1 goal should be to attract and keep contributors. If I'm not mistaken, that would benefit all classes here (Whales, Dolphins, Minnows). In order to do this, we need new contributors to have more opportunities to earn around $50 on a post. It seems like limiting votes will make that even less likely... and makes my vote that I worked so hard to get to .01-.02 pretty much worthless if I vote for more than 5 posts. I am honestly confused. I can't see who this benefits.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorhanshotfirst
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t045530438z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 04:55:27
last_update2016-09-03 04:55:27
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length484
author_reputation714,688,106,227,587
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,562
net_rshares28,012,917,947
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@kevinwong ·
$0.44
Yes one big part of the fun for me is to just vote for whatever that tickles my fancy, even comments. 5 a day would sap the fun out of curating without being too calculative.
πŸ‘  , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorkevinwong
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t025141187z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 02:51:45
last_update2016-09-03 02:51:45
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.413 HBD
curator_payout_value0.030 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length174
author_reputation621,253,570,295,288
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,595
net_rshares892,315,429,884
author_curate_reward""
vote details (6)
@pcste ·
im already getting losing the fun with voting slider, getting annoying how it pops up evrytime i'm just voting on this post lol
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpcste
permlinkre-kevinwong-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t041035015z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 04:10:33
last_update2016-09-03 04:10:33
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length127
author_reputation112,529,675,837,494
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,169
net_rshares2,569,097,378
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@psychonaut ·
Same here.

Sometimes I upvote 90% of the comments in a post, if they're all good!
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-kevinwong-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t085910900z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 08:59:12
last_update2016-09-03 08:59:12
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length82
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,143
net_rshares2,569,097,378
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@markrmorrisjr ·
$2.11
Not only that, but it will decrease payouts, meaning fewer people will be focused on quality content. This seems like a bad idea. For such a libertarian platform, this feels pretty damn draconian.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t213836983z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:38:36
last_update2016-09-02 21:38:36
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value2.008 HBD
curator_payout_value0.100 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length196
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,927
net_rshares2,971,850,488,289
author_curate_reward""
vote details (8)
@nebcat ·
@steemitblog says we can vote as often as we like. ???
properties (22)
authornebcat
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t014051637z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["steemitblog"]}
created2016-09-03 01:42:21
last_update2016-09-03 01:42:21
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length54
author_reputation5,512,448,230,215
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,151
net_rshares0
@ned · (edited)
$0.05
The 5 votes per day is augmented when one uses less than 100% voting power.  Optimally one could vote 20 times per day with 15-40% voting power. We're moving the threshold for using the voting meter at time of voting to 1mVest (~300 STEEM) so most anyone can use it.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorned
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t215444655z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:54:45
last_update2016-09-02 22:44:54
depth2
children19
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.036 HBD
curator_payout_value0.010 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length266
author_reputation94,449,026,656,258
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,091
net_rshares112,833,971,797
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@asch ·
$0.09
Hi Ned. Listen to this: right now I have invested into ~8800 Steem power. I spend each day a lot of time curating  stories. If i'm *very* lucky I earn 4 Steem power a day for that. However... I also get ~72 Steem power per day just because of holding this 8800 Steem Power. This shows that the job of curation is actually marginally profitable. Why spending all this time curating stories to get only a little 5% more Steem Power. Why actually spending time pressing upvote buttons if you already get 95% for free?! Lowering this daily reward for curators will do a lot of bad to SteemIt, is my believe! I know its all a balancing game, but I think this will tip the curator job out of the steemit picture. Just my 2-steem-power-cents.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorasch
permlinkre-ned-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t222557401z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:26:00
last_update2016-09-02 22:26:00
depth3
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.079 HBD
curator_payout_value0.012 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length735
author_reputation272,380,726,778
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,451
net_rshares215,384,150,536
author_curate_reward""
vote details (22)
@burnin ·
Won't bots just do that?

Also, I feel it's much better for community building spreading small votes around than casting 4 big votes.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorburnin
permlinkre-ned-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t222010089z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:20:09
last_update2016-09-02 22:20:09
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length133
author_reputation15,792,464,317,401
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,370
net_rshares10,253,172,076
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@clevecross ·
Can I ask for a post with a little more detail on this? I am a very active user.... On a good chunk of every day, so if I am never at 100%.... It'll never matter?
properties (22)
authorclevecross
permlinkre-ned-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220042205z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:00:42
last_update2016-09-02 22:00:42
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length162
author_reputation7,635,074,529,912
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,152
net_rshares0
@donkeypong ·
Ned, everyone should have the voting slider and I support that. But if we use the slider (as many of the large accounts have been doing, including with their "good guy" voting bots), then we don't really need this change.
properties (22)
authordonkeypong
permlinkre-ned-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220358155z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:04:15
last_update2016-09-02 22:04:15
depth3
children4
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length221
author_reputation431,667,636,679,304
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,179
net_rshares0
@psychonaut ·
@ned, offtopic but I noticed that overnight the 'home' and clicking 'steemit beta' brings me back to my own feed.

Being a new user this is a problem, there really isn't anything there yet.

But even if there was, doesn't this promote "inbreeding" behavior ? More and more people will only see the posts on their feed.

At the very least, I think this should be a configurable setting. I'd prefer 'home' to not be my feed, I'm sure many others agree.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-ned-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t085328200z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned"]}
created2016-09-03 08:53:27
last_update2016-09-03 08:53:27
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length450
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,103
net_rshares2,715,902,943
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@razvanelulmarin ·
that's a cool feature, why not mention it too?!?!
properties (22)
authorrazvanelulmarin
permlinkre-ned-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221152244z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:12:09
last_update2016-09-02 22:12:09
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length49
author_reputation176,753,416,199,361
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,256
net_rshares0
@teamsteem ·
$0.30
People who aren't good curator won't be whether or not there is the slider so it wouldn't have made sense not to add the slider from most everyone. 

This will solved the voting on comments problems. There's so many comments I'd like to upvote for 1-2 cent and I feel like these could add up if everyone did this. Surely everyone will have an incentive to upvote the best comments on their own posts and this would surely lead to more meaningful conversation.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorteamsteem
permlinkre-ned-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220534888z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:05:33
last_update2016-09-02 22:05:33
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.229 HBD
curator_payout_value0.071 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length459
author_reputation284,804,541,406,803
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,191
net_rshares638,477,833,562
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@timcliff ·
@ned - I am still undecided on how I feel about this feature. I keep seeing pros and cons, depending on how user's alter their behavior once the change is implemented. Right now, the biggest argument against it seems to be this. Do you have a good response?

While users can effectively still vote on 40 posts like they do today by reducing the voting power they spend on each vote - what is stopping the average 'heavyweight' voter from just finding the 4 posts that they think will have the best chance of curation rewards for the day, voting on those, and being done? Doesn't the new system encourage users to vote on less content?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authortimcliff
permlinkre-ned-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t024158592z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned"]}
created2016-09-03 02:41:57
last_update2016-09-03 02:41:57
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length634
author_reputation272,954,445,077,789
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,528
net_rshares9,365,461,771
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@oumar · (edited)
I completely agree with you @donkeypong with this everybody will be using their votes more selectively, only for content in certain topics hence bringing down the diversity in Steemit again! Having to calculate and select the weight percentage of your vote for each vote in order to vote more than 5 times is non sense.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authoroumar
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t012403459z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["donkeypong"]}
created2016-09-03 01:24:06
last_update2016-09-03 01:28:30
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length319
author_reputation3,866,019,128,933
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,050
net_rshares8,992,999,653
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@owdy · (edited)
$13.01
Well, it looks like I'm late to the party again. The 40->5 vote change **is needed** and I'm disappointed that your comment appears first, because it will give the community the idea that it's not the right move.  

People need to stop getting all panicky when new updates are proposed, understand where they're coming from and what they attempt to solve. When disagreeing, try to bring up a potential **solution** to address that  problem instead of outright opposing any change. **This is how we will progress effectively**.

### In this case, the goal is to increase organic voting power vs bot power. I think everyone will agree that this is positive. Now, how do we improve the implementation?

### The solution is simple.

All we need is this:
* A *Default* voting power of a fraction of what it is now (say 10%)
* A "Settings" tab for each account, where users can change their *Default* voting power

This way, new users **don't** get confused. Serious curators **can** get the most out of their daily upvotes. Bots have **less** influence on the network. **Everyone** is happy.

---
*In the future, we could add the option to "Opt in" to have a voting slider. I think this would be a plus, but isn't 100% needed. In the same way, I think we should allow everyone to vote with full power on a single post per day if they want (comes down to the same as limiting # of votes/day to 1 and allowing full range to vote weight)*
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorowdy
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t013502767z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:35:06
last_update2016-09-03 03:49:39
depth2
children15
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value9.767 HBD
curator_payout_value3.242 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,430
author_reputation3,152,666,625,062
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,117
net_rshares9,480,966,684,514
author_curate_reward""
vote details (23)
@donkeypong · (edited)
That would be an added set of "nice to have" features and provide more flexibility. Does it solve whatever issue they are trying to address with the proposed change? I'm not sure it does, just like I'm not sure their main proposal solves very much without some cost. I thank you for some good ideas, which the community should consider. I also hope people see @liberosist 's short comment that is buried somewhere deep below this post, which suggests a couple of simple ways they might be able to thwart bots without causing such an unneeded overhaul as the one they propose.

Ultimately, the main issue is giving the community time to consider and debate these proposed changes and discuss them before having them magically take effect with the assent of witnesses who do not seem to have vocal opinions themselves.
properties (22)
authordonkeypong
permlinkre-owdy-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t035733586z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["liberosist"]}
created2016-09-03 03:57:51
last_update2016-09-03 04:00:36
depth3
children4
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length816
author_reputation431,667,636,679,304
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,068
net_rshares0
@liberosist · (edited)
$0.52
I'm all for decreasing bot power, but not at the cost of human curators who make the Steemit community thrive with diversity. As I mentioned elsewhere, there are at least 50-100 posts worthy of upvotes every single day. 

Targeting 5 votes per day is a slap in the face to every serious curator on Steemit. It's clear from the comments that a vast majority of regular curators are heavily opposed to this - we're simply being encouraged to stop curating content. 

The hidden gems which can only be found by looking at each and every post round the clock incoming through the "New" feed will be lost forever. No casual curator who's only voting 5 times a day or under will ever bother with full time deep curation.
πŸ‘  , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorliberosist
permlinkre-owdy-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t081542338z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 08:16:03
last_update2016-09-03 08:17:18
depth3
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.393 HBD
curator_payout_value0.126 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length714
author_reputation177,167,275,265,899
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,877
net_rshares1,019,489,426,937
author_curate_reward""
vote details (6)
@psychonaut ·
$0.19
How can new authors (like me) ever hope to be noticed and upvoted by whales, if the target becomes 5 instead of 40?

It's already damn near impossible at 40. I don't see how lowering it to 5 will help.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-owdy-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t083957700z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 08:39:57
last_update2016-09-03 08:39:57
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.142 HBD
curator_payout_value0.044 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length201
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,021
net_rshares417,567,193,231
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@timcliff · (edited)
Yes! A settings tab for each account to set the default voting power would be very helpful! A separate setting for comments and posts would be nice too.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authortimcliff
permlinkre-owdy-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t021328551z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 02:13:27
last_update2016-09-03 02:13:48
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length152
author_reputation272,954,445,077,789
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,343
net_rshares3,873,323,048
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@timcliff ·
I included your idea in the latest edition of the <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit-ideas/@timcliff/the-steemit-wish-list-a-comprehensive-list-of-enhancement-requests-from-the-steemit-community-v1-2">Steemit Wish List</a>.
properties (22)
authortimcliff
permlinkre-owdy-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160909t223143696z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steemit-ideas/@timcliff/the-steemit-wish-list-a-comprehensive-list-of-enhancement-requests-from-the-steemit-community-v1-2"]}
created2016-09-09 22:31:42
last_update2016-09-09 22:31:42
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length225
author_reputation272,954,445,077,789
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,189,870
net_rshares0
@sauravrungta ·
$0.09
Totally agree with you @donkeypong. In fact I was shocked when I read it here. I couldn't believe my eyes. All my concerns have already been so well put by you so I won't bother. 

Hope the team looks at this very cautiously as this is very very important and directly connected to Steemit's success.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorsauravrungta
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t065655013z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["donkeypong"]}
created2016-09-03 06:56:54
last_update2016-09-03 06:56:54
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.071 HBD
curator_payout_value0.022 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length300
author_reputation681,518,124,448,054
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,421
net_rshares218,285,216,891
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@sc-steemit ·
[1, 5, 10, 500 votes per day. It doesn't matter and how to solve the issue](https://steemit.com/steemit/@sc-steemit/1-5-10-500-votes-per-day-it-doesn-t-matter-and-how-to-solve-the-issue)
properties (22)
authorsc-steemit
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160904t173345971z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steemit/@sc-steemit/1-5-10-500-votes-per-day-it-doesn-t-matter-and-how-to-solve-the-issue"]}
created2016-09-04 17:33:51
last_update2016-09-04 17:33:51
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length186
author_reputation28,448,644,499,713
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,124,825
net_rshares0
@shenanigator · (edited)
$0.04
Beginning today, all users with approximately 300+ SP have the option to adjust their voting meter. Therefore, **people can still place as many votes as they want, but should adjust their voting meter accordingly.** Granted, for the whales, it would be nice to have an option less than 1% since votes will now be worth 8x as much.

- 5 votes per day at 100%
- 10 votes at 50%
- 20 votes at 25%
- 25 votes at 20%
- 50 votes at 10%
- 100 votes at 5%
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorshenanigator
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t004242393z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 00:42:36
last_update2016-09-03 01:06:39
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.036 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length447
author_reputation61,400,000,740,515
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,762
net_rshares87,624,725,293
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@smooth · (edited)
$0.99
I'm undecided about the vote power change, but I wanted to respond to this;

> Under this scheme, the big whales will need to sell the max on exchanges every week and other people buy their Steem for any real redistribution to occur. That will hold down the price and our competitors will zoom right by us.

This is **absolutely what is needed**. There is no substitute for redistributing the stake if you want a fairer system with less concentration of power. Even if every whale did this (and they aren't) and even if it were at the maximum rate in all cases and completely uninterrupted (which it isn't), _it would still take a full year to redistribute half_ of the whale stake.

This maybe isn't what people want to hear in terms of trying to drive up the market price but this is the bitter medicine that Steem/it needs to thrive more than anything else.

FWIW,  I happen to believe that the path to higher market prices comes from increasing demand by creating a better system -- including a better distribution of stake as soon as possible (which as as said above, still isn't particularly soon) -- and not from trying to reduce supply by holding back redistribution. If the path to a successful outcome is clear, the market will reward that with higher prices, regardless of the amount of whale selling going on (or indeed because of it).
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t215528700z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:55:30
last_update2016-09-02 23:46:15
depth2
children19
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.749 HBD
curator_payout_value0.243 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,347
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,095
net_rshares1,763,479,298,400
author_curate_reward""
vote details (18)
@donkeypong · (edited)
$0.02
Smooth, good point and I mostly agree with you. It's a fact that selling is the main way to redistribute, since voting simply generates more curation rewards for whales. But I've worked with a number of large whale accounts on curation lately and I've admired what you are doing with your own curation also. If there's no reason to vote much and stick around, then I think it would be a loss for Steemit to have the large accounts staying dormant and simply selling the max when they could be actively using their scale for good work. 

Plus, if you really want this platform (and your stake in it) to succeed, then you have incentive to build it, and I would hope that you are spending some of your curation rewards to make it better for others. That has the same net effect on redistribution as selling does. 

Every economic system has its rich and poor; Steemit at least gives the poor a chance to rise. Redistribution can occur at those middle levels, too. It would take so long to fully redistribute resources that I'd rather you guys just continue your good work and help the platform that way, while selling some of your gains. If there's no reason to vote and stick around to make it better, then the max selling is about the only activity we'll see.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authordonkeypong
permlinkre-smooth-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t222240977z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:22:57
last_update2016-09-02 22:23:54
depth3
children6
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.019 HBD
curator_payout_value0.005 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,259
author_reputation431,667,636,679,304
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,411
net_rshares60,860,794,493
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@steemychicken1 ·
$1.05
dumping isnt the only way of distibuting steem.. a small percent can be worked out with giveaways... contests... developement projects... or even airdrops... too many ways... killing everu buy order isnt the only solution... cause eventually who will be interested in the platform if 1 steem worths 1 satoshi? even getting 10k steem power it will worth nothing for voting. Balance and options is the key.
πŸ‘  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorsteemychicken1
permlinkre-smooth-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t224853548z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:49:09
last_update2016-09-02 22:49:09
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.787 HBD
curator_payout_value0.259 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length404
author_reputation1,641,136,985,256,015
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,724
net_rshares1,780,561,300,851
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@tjpezlo ·
$0.37
"There is no substitute for redistributing the stake if you want a fairer system with less concentration of power",  i strongly agree with this. From the outside, people see the platform as a clssic MLM strategy disguised in a a social media platform. The see it as a scam. For us who trade at polo, its really hard to sell the idea... i think this platform  is revolutionary, and the only thing that makes people to hate it is becuse of its distribution. Its a caste system rulled by whales. Which reminds me of NXT which had all the fundamentals to succeed but did not, because of how it was distributed from the start.
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authortjpezlo
permlinkre-smooth-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t222937813z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:29:45
last_update2016-09-02 22:29:45
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.277 HBD
curator_payout_value0.089 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length621
author_reputation11,144,454,418,634
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,489
net_rshares757,525,260,210
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@tuck-fheman ·
So are you saying that you feel increasing the supply of STEEM on the market will increase the number of new investors? IIRC, you've stated repeatedly for months that few new investors existed. 

Do you now feel that a lower STEEM price will make new investors suddenly want to grab it up? 

Personally, I don't see people saying, **"If only the price of STEEM would go lower, then I'd get on board!"**. 

Where were they when the price was at .30 cents? Although debatable, I feel that not that much has changed in the platform between now and then and generally people don't like catching falling knives.

IMHO, a lower priced STEEM will simply be grabbed up by the existing true believer whales at the lower price after selling off their STEEM at a higher price. I'm fairly certain that's what most of us that believe in the platform are doing. But I don't see many big new investors coming on board. 

What may be considered "big investors" that are coming on board are simply posting for thousands of dollars per day and powering up or cashing out. I don't see those accounts buying STEEM. In fact, **I see them basically defending themselves to anyone questioning them for being here by boasting about how they've put nothing into the system out of their own pocket**.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you that the scenario you describe is what "should" happen, if others saw Steemit the way we do, but I am simply pointing out what "is" happening from what I can tell, and the perception of others is usually entirely different from those of us that have been here for a while.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authortuck-fheman
permlinkre-smooth-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t050205727z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 05:02:12
last_update2016-09-03 05:02:12
depth3
children6
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,589
author_reputation345,778,813,561,569
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,623
net_rshares38,704,462,901
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@webosfritos ·
@donkeypong @smooth I'm against this new  5 vote rule. I think it won't solve the power concentration problem, only make it worse. I think  trying to "patch" the current system won't do it either, a new solution with a fresh start to the power distribution must be sought or the platform will wither and die, and competitors will just fly past... I wrote an article that you may find interesting based on the anthropological approach of the disrtibution of power in a society/ecosystem https://steemit.com/steemit/@webosfritos/thoughts-on-steemit-power-distribution-and-steempower-an-anthropology-based-approach which at the end of the day is what's happening here, nothing new, this type of problem has cursed human societies and structures since the dawn of time.
properties (22)
authorwebosfritos
permlinkre-smooth-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160908t190743523z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["donkeypong","smooth"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steemit/@webosfritos/thoughts-on-steemit-power-distribution-and-steempower-an-anthropology-based-approach"]}
created2016-09-08 19:07:45
last_update2016-09-08 19:07:45
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length765
author_reputation4,048,286,563,134
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,175,581
net_rshares0
@steemgrindr ·
Just made a post about a possible solution - allow people to select how many high powered votes they want to have available. That way the power users aren't being limited and the less active users aren't 'wasting' their voting power. 

https://steemit.com/steem/@steemgrindr/big-changes-are-coming-take-control-of-your-voting-power-a-proposed-solution-for-the-new-steem-candidate
properties (22)
authorsteemgrindr
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t023630015z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@steemgrindr/big-changes-are-coming-take-control-of-your-voting-power-a-proposed-solution-for-the-new-steem-candidate"]}
created2016-09-03 02:36:33
last_update2016-09-03 02:36:33
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length379
author_reputation1,620,506,815,414
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,490
net_rshares0
@stellabelle ·
$0.70
reducing votes will equal reducing fun, which in turn will make people feel stressed, which will make people want to leave. Changing to 5 is a very bad idea.
We need to restructure our attention to this: how can we make steemit so fun that people don't want to leave. There's a reason people do drugs so much: they are fun, create temporary happiness and they are escapist and addictive. Steemit needs to study human motivation and make things fun.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t060251294z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 06:02:51
last_update2016-09-03 06:02:51
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.531 HBD
curator_payout_value0.170 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length448
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,085
net_rshares1,302,358,910,022
author_curate_reward""
vote details (15)
@theoretical ·
$0.13
As a strong proponent of this change, my thoughts are [here](/steem/@theoretical/learning-to-love-the-voting-power-equilibrium-point-change).
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authortheoretical
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t013717444z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["/steem/@theoretical/learning-to-love-the-voting-power-equilibrium-point-change"]}
created2016-09-03 01:37:15
last_update2016-09-03 01:37:15
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.130 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length141
author_reputation30,164,760,525,645
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,124
net_rshares299,203,638,753
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@timcliff ·
Looks like your link is broken. 

This link works:
https://steemit.com/steem/@theoretical/learning-to-love-the-voting-power-equilibrium-point-change
properties (22)
authortimcliff
permlinkre-theoretical-re-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t020442664z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@theoretical/learning-to-love-the-voting-power-equilibrium-point-change"]}
created2016-09-03 02:04:42
last_update2016-09-03 02:04:42
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length148
author_reputation272,954,445,077,789
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,302
net_rshares0
@tjpezlo · (edited)
it will be a boring platform if they pursue this....
Steemit is dead.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authortjpezlo
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221813848z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:18:21
last_update2016-09-02 22:20:18
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length69
author_reputation11,144,454,418,634
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,348
net_rshares2,850,823,006
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@eeks ·
$0.45
40 votes per day to 5 is a 90% decrease.  That is way too extreme.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authoreeks
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221302538z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:13:06
last_update2016-09-02 22:13:06
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.402 HBD
curator_payout_value0.048 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length66
author_reputation21,536,775,583,000
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,274
net_rshares906,504,827,107
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@egjoshslim ·
why is there not really much here for existing long term non whales :( I have been here for a long time now and i don't really see much here for us.
properties (22)
authoregjoshslim
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t201510506z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:15:06
last_update2016-09-02 20:15:06
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length148
author_reputation4,454,717,561,447
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,938
net_rshares0
@noisy ·
$0.52
> Target Votes of 5 per Day instead of 40

this is for us :)

as @ned said:

> Under these rules, a person voting once per day at full power will have greater value than it would under current rules. 

so if your friend will vote for you, you will be able to get more :)
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authornoisy
permlinkre-egjoshslim-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t202116984z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned"]}
created2016-09-02 20:21:15
last_update2016-09-02 20:21:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.388 HBD
curator_payout_value0.129 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length270
author_reputation59,974,373,499,600
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,001
net_rshares1,016,176,925,370
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@glitterfart ·
I'm wondering ... there will be much less votes now, how is that doing to affect the reputation ?
I mean, if you receive less votes, you may have a hard timetime increase your reputation.  
That would be unfair for newbies compared to people who gained their rep when it was easy to have lots of cheap votes. 
Maybe the rep system count the weight of the vote instead of the vote itself ?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorglitterfart
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t031750490z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:17:45
last_update2016-09-03 03:17:45
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length388
author_reputation48,401,633,178,775
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,760
net_rshares4,220,578,935
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@tinyhomeliving ·
If I have not already said so...I LOVE YOUR NAME!
properties (22)
authortinyhomeliving
permlinkre-glitterfart-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t034151164z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:41:51
last_update2016-09-03 03:41:51
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length49
author_reputation13,322,550,598,055
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,944
net_rshares0
@hien-tran ·
Thanks!

I love steemit

Steemit how wonderful you are.
You create a very wonderful platform for us.
You are richly displayed with silver and crimson.
Ooh how nice you are very spiced.
Like a mirror on the wall how helpful you are.
Our comments and contents are very valued,
how motherly you are to us, you blossom day by day.
I have learnt to write, because you are an amazing teacher.
I always want to learn, how you make life nice and conducive.
I love you steemit because you are very gentle you are you have made me learn more.
O maiden you are a chaplet of roses laid down.
Steemit what name do I give you,
crown of the bride, gold or silver?
You blossom like white sheets, how unique you are.
A social block chain you are and give niche.
A movement of reward you are to us. How I love you steemit.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorhien-tran
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t120720429z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 12:07:21
last_update2016-09-03 12:07:21
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length804
author_reputation26,408,240,002,629
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,110,313
net_rshares208,539,419
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@hms818 ·
Glad to hear about the progress .... thanks for sharing....
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorhms818
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194459320z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:45:00
last_update2016-09-02 19:45:00
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length59
author_reputation11,503,740,391,093
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,557
net_rshares1,387,807,935
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@hr1 ·
$0.36
If I understand it correctly 5 new votes at 100% are equal to 40 at 12.5%. So there is **no change for bots**, but two changes for human curators:
1) the **cognitive load** if one wants to vote more often manually
2) possibility to **vote less** while keeping the **same influence** ( ~ ability to supercharge your vote if viewed from the old perspective)

The question is, if there is no change for bots, are these 2 changes **beneficial for human curators** and for the **system overall?**
πŸ‘  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorhr1
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160904t111028514z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-04 11:10:27
last_update2016-09-04 11:10:27
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.353 HBD
curator_payout_value0.006 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length491
author_reputation7,226,856,136,834
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,121,288
net_rshares1,731,605,847,526
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@jademont ·
$7.20
"Escrow Transfers

The Steem network now comes with native support for advanced escrow transfers of STEEM and Steem Dollars. "

Isn't this feature supposed to be integrated into Bitshares? anyway BTS is targeted to be a financial platform.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorjademont
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t035220636z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:52:06
last_update2016-09-03 03:52:06
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value5.403 HBD
curator_payout_value1.798 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length239
author_reputation75,317,924,269,597
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,028
net_rshares6,646,146,231,386
author_curate_reward""
vote details (10)
@james-show ·
What was the code name for this update/hard fork... ohhh yes _"The Good, The Bad, but Really The Ugly"_
And yet all comments where about the  __no-change change__.  Here is donkeypong . How many times do you want to vote per day? 50 times? OK, 5/50=0.1. Go set your vote wight to 10% and vote 50 times.
So, as I said a no-change change. And this applies to the minnows too - the curation reward is really in Vests, which has nice precision (not like your Steem ) go calculate your vote weight using the formula above and proceed as before.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now to the ugly part.
 @ dan - so now "SD is actually equal to 1 USD ... but only sometimes... if our (Steem's) market cap falls too much it is equal to less.
Nice, cool really :)
And what this will do to the price of SD? SD will sell for even bigger discount, what do you think 30% maybe... What will dantheman do to guard the peg, keep a 100,000 Steem order at all times?
What a joke....
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorjames-show
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t000012630z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 00:00:21
last_update2016-09-03 00:00:21
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,019
author_reputation5,698,866,469,447
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,443
net_rshares38,433,387,328
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@jamesbrown ·
Can you add a "bookmark", or "favorites",  feature that saves our favorite posts inside of a folder (or under a tab), which allows us to sort and/or categorize them by author, type of content, how highly we rate it, etc?

Also, if you choose to add this feature, can you also add *most favorites* (*most bookmarked*) as a tab (along with home, new, hot, trending, promoted, and active)?  Perhaps you can allow the top 100, or 10 (or any arbitrary number that you decide upon), most bookmarked posts to have a third payout period, or some other added perk for providing so much value to Steemit.  This label, of most bookmarked post, would then become the most sought after achievement and this would likely up the motivation to make top quality posts even higher.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorjamesbrown
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t183146726z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 18:31:54
last_update2016-09-03 18:31:54
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length763
author_reputation16,631,565,299,506
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,114,254
net_rshares2,638,468,985
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@jasonstaggers ·
> Target Votes of 5 per Day instead of 40

Does this mean if I weight all of my votes at 25% then I can spread my power out over  20 votes  rather than 5? Or 12.5% each and it's back to 40 as if nothing changed?
properties (22)
authorjasonstaggers
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t234004810z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 23:40:09
last_update2016-09-02 23:40:09
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length211
author_reputation20,092,968,801,340
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,260
net_rshares0
@jasonstaggers ·
So my vote is usually worth about 2 cents but just voted at 25% power and there was no change to the value of the post. So the reweighting reduces the dollar amount but doesn't spread out the voting power?
properties (22)
authorjasonstaggers
permlinkre-jasonstaggers-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t235453348z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 23:54:57
last_update2016-09-02 23:54:57
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length205
author_reputation20,092,968,801,340
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,403
net_rshares0
@jrcornel ·
Did the "feed" tab disappear?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorjrcornel
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t201029634z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:10:30
last_update2016-09-02 20:10:30
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length29
author_reputation2,133,450,396,741,846
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,896
net_rshares553,911,131
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@nubchai ·
Click on the Home button and you'll see the feed of users you're following.
properties (22)
authornubchai
permlinkre-jrcornel-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t224945079z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:49:45
last_update2016-09-02 22:49:45
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length75
author_reputation4,449,023,342,893
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,730
net_rshares0
@jrcornel ·
Would 10 votes be a better number? 5 seems a bit low...
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorjrcornel
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t203005304z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:30:06
last_update2016-09-02 20:30:06
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length55
author_reputation2,133,450,396,741,846
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,113
net_rshares553,911,131
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@knircky ·
just vote at 50% every time and u have 10 votes.... if u want 20 use 25% etc
properties (22)
authorknircky
permlinkre-jrcornel-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t035816449z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:58:15
last_update2016-09-03 03:58:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length76
author_reputation212,905,587,244,262
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,071
net_rshares0
@jrcornel ·
It seems dropping the number of votes will decrease the total number of voting on the platform and also decrease the payouts across the board... I get wanting to bridge the gap between the highest paid and the lowest paid, but I think the highest paid will drop only slightly in value but there will be a lot more zero payouts then ever before... just my initial thought
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorjrcornel
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t203824810z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:38:27
last_update2016-09-02 20:38:27
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length370
author_reputation2,133,450,396,741,846
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,218
net_rshares3,903,255,928
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@knircky ·
nope. it will just make is so that lazy people that don't vote more than 5 times have a higher say how much gets distributed.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorknircky
permlinkre-jrcornel-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t035852535z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:58:51
last_update2016-09-03 03:58:51
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length125
author_reputation212,905,587,244,262
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,073
net_rshares3,349,344,797
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@jsteck · (edited)
To everyone who has replied that these changes are bad for them and how they currently interact I recommend re-reading and thinking about whether the changes are good for steem and steemit. 

I haven't decided yet. It may take a day or two to think it all the way through. I may decide it is good overall and that I will need to adjust to it.

Where would msgivings be if people (and bots, whatever) had to be careful with their votes?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorjsteck
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t014442461z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:44:42
last_update2016-09-03 01:48:33
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length435
author_reputation1,385,142,756,985
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,170
net_rshares965,698,411
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@karenb54 ·
Well all I can say after reading all the comments is I still don't have a clue what is going on or whether this is a good/bad move. I'm a minnow my vote doesn't mean anything so am I going to be better of and am my votes going to mean more... english please
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorkarenb54
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221448041z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:14:51
last_update2016-09-02 22:14:51
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length257
author_reputation711,717,006,747,504
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,305
net_rshares1,757,359,091
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@karenmckersie ·
I find all of this  to be quite complicated, and hard for newbie to understand, can someone please decifer this down and  just point out the details in easy to understand terms. Or perhaps break it down piece by piece and list the most important parts. 
Also it does say you can still vote as often as you want, but only 5 times a day?! What exactly does this mean!? Please clarify.   Thanks. πŸ˜‰πŸ€”
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5Vq13sIcAA2r0d.jpg
Image credit  twitter.com
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorkarenmckersie
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t023255955z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"image":["https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5Vq13sIcAA2r0d.jpg"]}
created2016-09-03 02:33:03
last_update2016-09-03 02:33:03
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length469
author_reputation280,862,618,735,740
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,462
net_rshares50,249,177
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@khanhsang ·
thanks for sharing
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorkhanhsang
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160905t041537142z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-05 04:16:36
last_update2016-09-05 04:16:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length18
author_reputation870,887,479,553
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,129,977
net_rshares8,048,079,192
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@kooshikoo ·
I wanted to vote up the comments saying that people would refrain from voting on comments with 5 votes per day.. Then I thought" should I really use my precious vote just for this comment."
I guess the intention was good,but this might kill the comment sections to a large degree.
properties (22)
authorkooshikoo
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t213100365z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:30:36
last_update2016-09-02 21:30:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length280
author_reputation2,159,492,091,156
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,815
net_rshares0
@kus-knee ·
I have been busy improving the quality of my articles and also spend a lot of time curating. If there are only 5 votes per day I think that it hinders me as an emerging writer and as an emerging curator. 

I like to pick out good articles that have few votes and little in the way of financial rewards and encourage and mentor them. If this is not done they just get discouraged and leave. I will be able to do very little of that with 5 votes!

I also like to "tip" good comments on my posts to help build loyalty and relationships. How much of that can I do with 5 votes?
You are and have been building something great here but the 5 votes is a bad idea.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorkus-knee
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t224146365z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:41:48
last_update2016-09-02 22:41:48
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length656
author_reputation307,925,583,264,282
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,635
net_rshares2,348,889,031
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@lemooljiang ·
Change a lot, everyone should have a look.
properties (22)
authorlemooljiang
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t125222829z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 12:52:27
last_update2016-09-03 12:52:27
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length42
author_reputation438,608,506,193,732
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,110,657
net_rshares0
@liberosist · (edited)
$2.63
5 posts per day target is far too little. It's just going to completely disincentivize curation. Curation is a crucial part of Steemit. To see it disrupted so severely may lead to a significant loss in diversity and quality of trending posts. 

I understand that bots need to be controlled, but this completely takes away voting power from the normal users.

Some ideas - enforce time limits, i.e. 1 vote per minute - something that'll clearly catch out bots over normal users. Or accounts with low SP can have a 5 per day target.
πŸ‘  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorliberosist
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t200731507z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:07:54
last_update2016-09-02 20:11:39
depth1
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.972 HBD
curator_payout_value0.654 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length530
author_reputation177,167,275,265,899
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,864
net_rshares3,459,392,956,054
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@nubchai ·
It will discourage voting on comments too.  People will be conserving their votes for published content.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authornubchai
permlinkre-liberosist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221759208z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:18:00
last_update2016-09-02 22:18:00
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length104
author_reputation4,449,023,342,893
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,344
net_rshares4,261,431,350
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@owdy ·
>5 posts per day target is far too little. It's just going to completely disincentivize curation.

I really don't see them implementing a this without adding a way to scale down the power of your vote for each vote. If that's done, I'm **really** quite confident that it'll help incentivizing organic curation over bot curation. 

>Some ideas - enforce time limits, i.e. 1 vote per minute - something that'll clearly catch out bots over normal users.

1 vote per minute really wouldn't do much. At ~40 votes per day, that's about 1 vote per 36 mins. Even taking into consideration peak times where most posts are published, the odds of an "upvote collision" are fairly low. If anything, bot owners will only be forced to add a line of code that waits an extra minute before their next upvote. Make that 2-5 mins and you start seriously interfering with user experience, some posts are pretty short. Also, 1 min/upvote is a problem when considering comment upvotes, you'd have to start considering both as different. Not a fan of the rate limiting idea, I'd rather have lower influence/reward for voting more than having to wait.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorowdy
permlinkre-liberosist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t064253380z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 06:42:57
last_update2016-09-03 06:42:57
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,128
author_reputation3,152,666,625,062
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,345
net_rshares3,551,373,419
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@stranger27 ·
Time limit per vote would be best solution.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorstranger27
permlinkre-liberosist-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221000534z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:10:06
last_update2016-09-02 22:10:06
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length43
author_reputation49,275,349,388,874
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,238
net_rshares2,812,663,370
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@linkback-bot-v0 ·
linkback bot is contemplating android sheeps
<div>  <p>  This post has been linked to from another place on Steem.  </p>  <ul>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem/@trev/how-to-completely-eradicate-the-bots-once-and-for-all"> How to completely eradicate the bots once and for all </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@trev">  @trev </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem-help/@hisnameisolllie/rate-limited-voting-explained"> Rate Limited Voting - Explained </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@hisnameisolllie">  @hisnameisolllie </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@nanzo-scoop/building-a-steemit-economy-social-media-site-vs-blogging-rewards-platform"> Building a Steemit economy - social media site vs blogging rewards platform </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@nanzo-scoop">  @nanzo-scoop </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/kr/@morning/0-14-0-release-candidate"> [μŠ€μ‹œ] μŠ€νŒ€ 0.14.0 Release Candidate (배포 후보) ν•΄μ„€ </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@morning">  @morning </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem-help/@hisnameisolllie/the-new-5-vote-target-does-not-reduce-rewards-it-democratises-steemit-curation"> The New '5 Vote Target' does NOT Reduce Rewards - It Democratises Steemit Curation!! </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@hisnameisolllie">  @hisnameisolllie </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@burnin/how-does-the-voting-change-rule-impact-you-or-how-i-changed-my-mind"> How does the Voting Change Rule Impact You? (Or How I Changed My Mind) </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@burnin">  @burnin </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/ru/@sociopat/my-na-poroge-novoi-ekonomiki-steemit-obnovleniya"> ΠœΡ‹ Π½Π° ΠΏΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ³Π΅ Π½ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΉ экономики Steemit (обновлСния) </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@sociopat">  @sociopat </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem-help/@hisnameisolllie/steem-sustainable-debt-to-ownership-ratio-explained"> Steem Dollar Stability - Sustainable Debt to Ownership Ratio - Explained </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@hisnameisolllie">  @hisnameisolllie </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@ash/steemit-how-to-s-the-list-cw-35"> Steemit How-To's - The List CW 35 </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@ash">  @ash </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/curation/@littlescribe/should-alice-and-bob-have-an-equal-voice-in-curation"> 5 Vote Maximum...Not Really a Maximum. Don't Freak Out. </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@littlescribe">  @littlescribe </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemitabuse/@derekareith/steemit-idea-flagging-abusive-malicious-users"> Steemit Idea: Flagging Abusive/Malicious Users </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@derekareith">  @derekareith </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@luminousvisions/the-fellowship-of-the-dolphins"> The Fellowship of the Dolphins ~ Little Baby Dolphin </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@luminousvisions">  @luminousvisions </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem-stats/@hisnameisolllie/steemit-statistics-week-6-0-14-0-update-and-more"> Steemit Statistics Week 6 - 0.14.0 Update and more... </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@hisnameisolllie">  @hisnameisolllie </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@lemooljiang/25vy2b-hero-s-voice-daily"> Hero's voice daily  / 每ζ—₯名言堂 </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@lemooljiang">  @lemooljiang </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@cryptos/more-about-the-promoted-posts-and-the-new-voting-slider-feature"> More About the Promoted Posts and the New Voting Slider Feature </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@cryptos">  @cryptos </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@elyaque/steem-report-september-3rd"> STEEM REPORT SEPTEMBER, 3RD </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@elyaque">  @elyaque </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem/@ekitcho/why-steemit-post-replies-per-day-is-decreasing-my-own-case-global-analysis"> Why Steemit post/replies per day is decreasing [My own case + Global Analysis] </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@ekitcho">  @ekitcho </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@karenmckersie/a-major-upgrade-to-steem-protocal-today-im-sooooo-confused"> A major upgrade to steem protocal today! Im sooooo confused !? </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@karenmckersie">  @karenmckersie </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/curating/@knircky/annoyed-about-5-votes-think-before-complaining"> Confused about 5 votes? It actually makes sense! </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@knircky">  @knircky </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@pcste/new-features-on-steemit-home-and-feed-tags-and-topics-and-the-voting-bar-5-vote-issue-what-do-minnows-think"> new features on steemit - home and feed, Tags and Topics and the voting bar. 5 vote issue. what do minnows think? </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@pcste">  @pcste </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/cn/@jademont/steemit"> steemitε³ε°†εˆ°ζ₯ηš„ζ›΄ζ–°ι’„ε‘Š </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@jademont">  @jademont </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@krnel/why-5-votes-and-the-vote-bar-is-good-for-steemit"> Why 5 Votes and the Vote Bar is GOOD for Steemit! </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@krnel">  @krnel </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem/@craig-grant/steem-it-s-between-me-and-my-mechanical-reflection-voting-power-strategies"> STEEM, it's between me and my mechanical reflection (voting power strategies) </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@craig-grant">  @craig-grant </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem/@steemgrindr/big-changes-are-coming-take-control-of-your-voting-power-a-proposed-solution-for-the-new-steem-candidate"> Big Changes are Coming! Take Control of Your Voting Power! - A Proposed Solution for the New Steem Candidate </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@steemgrindr">  @steemgrindr </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem/@theoretical/learning-to-love-the-voting-power-equilibrium-point-change"> Learning to love the voting power equilibrium point change </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@theoretical">  @theoretical </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@creationlayer/steemit-update-the-time-is-now-to-get-noticed-and-what-is-it"> Steemit Update: The time is now to get noticed and what is it. </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@creationlayer">  @creationlayer </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@contentjunkie/5-votes-is-not-enough"> 5 Votes Is Not Enough </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@contentjunkie">  @contentjunkie </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/cryptocapitalism/@cryptogee/cryptocapitalism-vs-cryptocommunism-the-battle-rages-on"> Cryptocapitalism vs Cryptocommunism - The Battle Rages On </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@cryptogee">  @cryptogee </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@craig-grant/september-13th-hard-fork-to-reduce-voting-power-target-from-40-votes-per-day-to-5-votes-per-day"> September 13th Hard fork to reduce voting power target from 40 votes per day to 5 votes per day </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@craig-grant">  @craig-grant </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steem/@burnin/what-is-the-target-votes-5-per-day-change-anyway"> What is the Target Votes 5 per Day change, anyway? </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@burnin">  @burnin </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/spanish/@nelyp/steemit-actualizacion"> Steemit - ActualizaciΓ³n </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@nelyp">  @nelyp </a>     </li>        <li>      <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@ash/escrow-feature-announced-here-s-how-to-not-mess-up"> Escrow Feature announced, here's how to not mess up. </a>      by      <a href="https://steemit.com/@ash">  @ash </a>     </li>      </ul>  <p>  <a href="https://steemit.com/steemit/@ontofractal/steem-linkback-bot-update-v0-2-release">    About linkback bot   </a>   </p></div>
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorlinkback-bot-v0
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-linkbacks
categorysteem
json_metadata{}
created2016-09-07 21:58:12
last_update2016-09-07 21:58:12
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length8,739
author_reputation1,915,954,976,722
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,164,517
net_rshares4,141,517,789
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@mahekg ·
How about creating an official mobile app? I know there are some unofficial apps but it's hard to trust their security.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormahekg
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194430495z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:44:30
last_update2016-09-02 19:44:30
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length119
author_reputation2,470,250,819,178
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,551
net_rshares13,082,049,504
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@markrmorrisjr ·
So, if I am understanding it, on the vote number change, will this not impact the number of profitable votes a whale could give and dumb down the potential payouts?
properties (22)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t213313339z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:33:15
last_update2016-09-02 21:33:15
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length164
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,856
net_rshares0
@mata ·
Isn't the 40 -> 5 change just a game of numbers?

Suppose there are 10 curators, executing 20 full-weight upvotes per day each. Assuming they have equal power, each vote pays N / 200 where N is the total amount of author rewards for the day. Now under the 5 votes rule, they vote 20 times using 25% weight, there are still 200 votes a day, and each one pays N / 200. What's the difference then?
properties (22)
authormata
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160904t012824407z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-04 01:28:24
last_update2016-09-04 01:28:24
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length394
author_reputation299,439,555,653
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,117,887
net_rshares0
@matrixdweller ·
I think changing the daily up vote target from 40 to 5 is a genius way to combat up vote and down vote spam. I am confused as to what revoking voting permissions really means though maybe you could edit with a deeper explanation of it.
properties (22)
authormatrixdweller
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t200236080z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 20:03:09
last_update2016-09-03 20:03:09
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length235
author_reputation-29,653,420,748,873
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,115,148
net_rshares0
@merej99 ·
I'm a little distressed about my voting power being reduced so much with a 5 day regeneration.  (Did I read that correctly in the announcement?)
I am an organic voter.  I actually spend a significant amount of time looking for QUALITY content, as well as finding new-to-me creators while searching for mentors and being mentored.  
I know my upvotes don't count for squat right now but I'm really doing my best to engage, grow my readership, and build up my reputation as a curator and member of Steemit.  I don't rake in the big bucks, and neither do a lot of the people I follow.  Limiting us to 5 "super votes" is really going to discourage a lot of people who already have low visibility and desperate for eyes on their creations.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authormerej99
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221118930z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:10:18
last_update2016-09-02 22:10:18
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length734
author_reputation109,727,414,619,488
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,240
net_rshares6,813,456,495
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@psychonaut ·
I think this will be the result too..
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-merej99-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t090950300z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 09:09:51
last_update2016-09-03 09:09:51
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length37
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,222
net_rshares2,422,291,814
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@minion · (edited)
Edited out thanks @pfunk , I didn't notice it. :))
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorminion
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t104836155z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["pfunk"]}
created2016-09-03 10:48:27
last_update2016-09-03 14:05:33
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length50
author_reputation3,133,996,004,573
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,794
net_rshares6,521,418,265
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@pfunk ·
So to be clear, for lower SP accounts you don't see a flag slider? I see a flag slider here, though it's relatively new (a week old maybe?) 

http://i.imgur.com/80ZzGmD.png
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpfunk
permlinkre-minion-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t135409833z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"image":["http://i.imgur.com/80ZzGmD.png"]}
created2016-09-03 13:54:27
last_update2016-09-03 13:54:27
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length172
author_reputation221,632,045,904,452
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,111,228
net_rshares6,394,222,250
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@mrosenquist ·
$0.37
I think the 40 to 5 is too drastic and may have detrimental unintended consequences:
1.  It will cause people to spend less time looking for and at content.  They will, in their mind, upvote 5 times then walk away for the day.  That is the exact  opposite of what we want.
2. People will mostly first vote for posts they think they will get curation rewards on (high value posts) or those authors who seem to get high returns, alienating lesser known and new authors.
3. Whales can still abuse the system, by just voting for each other (or themselves via secondary accounts/aliases).  This does not stop bot activity, it just makes them create more bot accounts to do the same as they have done before.

I don't see a lot of upside here, but I recognize i don't have all the information.  A drop from 40 to 5 is extreme though.  How about dropping it from 40 to 20 instead as an interim measure.  See how the community responds and the bots adapt.  If all goes well, then drop it again to 10 or 5.
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authormrosenquist
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t205749239z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:57:57
last_update2016-09-02 20:57:57
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.282 HBD
curator_payout_value0.086 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length997
author_reputation178,495,942,506,925
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,422
net_rshares764,554,737,770
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@nelyp ·
1- Tutorials and a version of the platform in different languages (Pretty please!) - For example Spanish!!! We are increasing and it could really add value and most important, relevance.

2- Official App

3- More interactive tools to facilitate members' participation
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authornelyp
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t201144613z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:11:45
last_update2016-09-02 20:11:45
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length267
author_reputation258,605,913,011,246
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,912
net_rshares1,240,333,583
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@neopatriarch ·
How will this **NOT** reduce the number of people that get votes?  And minimize payouts for everyone else? Seems like this will prune back to all but the most popular posters and topics.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorneopatriarch
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t223358432z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:34:03
last_update2016-09-02 22:34:03
depth1
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length186
author_reputation7,890,030,523,506
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,542
net_rshares18,202,475,281
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@jsteck ·
Or will it reduce the number of people that get votes that are undeserved?  Payouts per day will remain the same.
properties (22)
authorjsteck
permlinkre-neopatriarch-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t015147966z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:51:48
last_update2016-09-03 01:51:48
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length113
author_reputation1,385,142,756,985
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,221
net_rshares0
@neopatriarch ·
That doesn't seem to be the problem.
> We are changing the target number of votes per day from 40 to 5 so that more people keep their voting power below 100%. 

If on the other hand, they had engaged in unrestrained voting, they would have been regularly under 100%.
properties (22)
authorneopatriarch
permlinkre-jsteck-re-neopatriarch-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t024948156z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 02:49:57
last_update2016-09-03 02:49:57
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length266
author_reputation7,890,030,523,506
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,584
net_rshares0
@neoxian · (edited)
$2.25
Wow, this is a lot of absorb,  I don't understand:
* Revoking Voting Permissions
* Target Votes of 5 per Day instead of 40 (only 5 votes a day??)

If you could expand on these two, that would be great, please.

edit:
hmm ok, just read this:
https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/324  So it's a way for a powerful account to voluntarily give up voting rights
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorneoxian
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194135381z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/324"]}
created2016-09-02 19:42:36
last_update2016-09-02 20:01:15
depth1
children46
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value2.062 HBD
curator_payout_value0.188 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length359
author_reputation167,518,222,673,938
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,520
net_rshares3,111,426,092,477
author_curate_reward""
vote details (13)
@jesta · (edited)
$1.07
Regarding the 5 votes a day bullet point - From what I understand, it's how fast your voting power regenerates. Right now you could cast ~40 votes a day, and have your voting power go back to 100% after 24 hours (or close). Lowering the number down to 5 would make it so that your voting power only regenerates 5 votes worth of power each day, thus making it so it's harder to stay at 100% voting power. 

The idea is that there's nothing wrong with being below 100% voting power - you can still vote, it just decreases in power the amount you vote each day. 

I think it's an experimental change to try and combat some of the curation bots that push the limits of rewards. But I could be totally wrong here :)
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorjesta
permlinkre-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t200036830z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:00:36
last_update2016-09-02 20:02:27
depth2
children8
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.912 HBD
curator_payout_value0.160 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length710
author_reputation140,605,453,893,072
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,776
net_rshares1,814,679,120,900
author_curate_reward""
vote details (16)
@blueorgy · (edited)
$0.08
There goes one of my 5... Was about to ask / guess this is what's going on. It seems a bit low to me however, I think a number around 20 might be more appropriate. Say you find 20 good posts to upvote a day (easy in my opinion) after a week or so, at this pace, you would find yourself with no power at all. Seems a bit limiting when it comes to rewarding users, however this does decrease the amount of Steem being created which has its benefits. IMHP
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorblueorgy
permlinkre-jesta-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t200945431z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:09:45
last_update2016-09-02 20:10:39
depth3
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.081 HBD
curator_payout_value0.001 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length452
author_reputation56,287,880,276,342
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,887
net_rshares196,841,014,639
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@burnin ·
$0.04
I'm looking at the code, and this doesn't seem to be the case. Aparently the regeneration speed is the same, but more voting power is spent each vote. I'm working out the implications and will write about it soon.
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authorburnin
permlinkre-jesta-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t203518192z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:35:18
last_update2016-09-02 20:35:18
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.033 HBD
curator_payout_value0.008 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length213
author_reputation15,792,464,317,401
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,176
net_rshares101,540,023,097
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@burnin ·
[Here's](https://steemit.com/steem/@burnin/what-is-the-target-votes-5-per-day-change-anyway) my analysis. 

As far as I can tell, effectively what this does is have each vote weight 10x as much as previously did (and correspondly as much Voting Power)
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorburnin
permlinkre-jesta-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t214903154z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@burnin/what-is-the-target-votes-5-per-day-change-anyway"]}
created2016-09-02 21:49:03
last_update2016-09-02 21:49:03
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length251
author_reputation15,792,464,317,401
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,034
net_rshares8,941,524,901
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@markrmorrisjr ·
And the payout that accompanies that vote. It sucks
properties (22)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-jesta-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t213704340z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:37:06
last_update2016-09-02 21:37:06
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length51
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,908
net_rshares0
@ned ·
$0.62
The expected result of the change in target votes from 40 to 5 is less discrepancy between top paid posts and the long tail of paid posts by decentralizing the Steem Power allocated by each voter, primarily whales and bots.  Under these rules, a person voting once per day at full power will have greater value than it would under current rules.  The target votes per day had been changed once before from 10 to 40, however, voting regeneration had also been changed (from one day to five).  Changing from 40 target votes to 5 without changing regeneration days allows Steem to ease into more optimal ratios for quality curation. 

The Revoking Voting Permission was a simple upgrade allowing anyone who sees regulatory risk in the ability to use voting power to remove voting power from their stake.  We do not expect this to be a feature used by most users, and it may not be used at all.  We have no plans at this time to bring this change to the Steemit UI.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorned
permlinkre-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t200650312z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:06:48
last_update2016-09-02 20:06:48
depth2
children34
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.548 HBD
curator_payout_value0.072 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length961
author_reputation94,449,026,656,258
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,849
net_rshares1,242,074,421,230
author_curate_reward""
vote details (12)
@anwenbaumeister ·
$4.82
I would also like to chime in on this topic. As many people have already mentioned, I think changing from 40 target votes to 5 without changing regeneration is actually just going to end up hurting new content creators who do not yet have their foot in the door. I can see a situation where people conserve their votes only for "hot" or "trending" posts or for authors who are already popular. I can see a situation where people only vote 5 per day on popular authors in hopes of gaining large curation rewards. This may create a situation where people may not want to "chance" their vote or give their vote to lesser-known creators.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authoranwenbaumeister
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t211528577z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:15:27
last_update2016-09-02 21:15:27
depth3
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.291 HBD
curator_payout_value0.530 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length633
author_reputation147,454,223,191,114
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,646
net_rshares6,103,809,655,991
author_curate_reward""
vote details (25)
@ats-david ·
@ned - Wouldn't this new 5-vote system just incentivize users to only vote on their own posts? If you post four times per day, why wouldn't you use four of your five full-power votes on yourself, and maybe save one for your own comment? 

I know there's a long tail, but surely that won't get shorter with less voting, right? New users who have no following or influence will still get very few, if any rewards. But now they won't even be voting for each other. Unless I'm missing something, I don't really see how the tail problem is fixed by this. Is there a more detailed explanation of this proposal?
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorats-david
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t035116450z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned"]}
created2016-09-03 03:51:15
last_update2016-09-03 03:51:15
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length604
author_reputation324,017,334,201,433
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,020
net_rshares40,581,895,352
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@blueorgy ·
$0.33
> Changing from 40 target votes to 5 without changing regeneration days allows Steem to ease into more optimal ratios for quality curation

This is true but also decreases the upvote power of a user a lot faster , lowering his /her ability to reward quality content more frequently. I do believe with the increase in users there is also an increase in quality content , limiting votes for users like myself would potentially let this good content go unrewarded or noticed and drive away the users who generate that quality content. I think the number may prove to be too limiting but this is my opinion. On the other hand I do like the slowing of exssesive Steem creation.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorblueorgy
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t201808323z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:18:09
last_update2016-09-02 20:18:09
depth3
children10
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.247 HBD
curator_payout_value0.081 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length672
author_reputation56,287,880,276,342
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,965
net_rshares691,248,318,608
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@elyaque ·
I totally disagree with that, like this if have to think who i will upvote and who not. I use steemit 3-4 hours a day, read and upvote a lot. If this will be changed whats the point to read and curate?
properties (22)
authorelyaque
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t233446888z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 23:34:48
last_update2016-09-02 23:34:48
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length201
author_reputation109,256,325,621,350
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,198
net_rshares0
@ervin-lemark ·
I have a better idea. Remove the voting function completely. Oh, you practically did this.
properties (22)
authorervin-lemark
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t225008188z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:50:36
last_update2016-09-02 22:50:36
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length90
author_reputation473,597,055,330,320
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,748
net_rshares0
@jako ·
>Changing from 40 target votes to 5 <b>without changing regeneration days</b> allows Steem to ease into more optimal ratios for quality curation.

People are stuck on the  "40 target" while the key point is <b>"without changing regeneration days"</b> This  will contribute to balance voting power by diminishing the impact of whales. The intention that underlines this feature is it seems to distribute more voting power accross users.

I think this is an interesting feature that has to be tested. Let's not prejudge the outcome, we cannot anticipate how each one of us will be affected by this change.
properties (22)
authorjako
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t223555168z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:35:57
last_update2016-09-02 22:35:57
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length603
author_reputation6,250,393,996,177
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,567
net_rshares0
@liberosist ·
$4.42
<blockquote>Under these rules, a person voting once per day at full power will have greater value than it would under current rules. </blockquote>

A person voting once per day is likely to be a casual curator. Someone who logs in a couple of times a day and simply votes on a couple of trending posts they like. This change severely impacts those who are regular and involved (human) curators, responsible for digging out diverse and niche content that a casual curator would likely miss. 

It would be fair to give a restrained curator greater power, but not penalizing regular deep curators so heavily at the same time. It may lead to a significant loss in diversity of content.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorliberosist
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t203608083z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:36:30
last_update2016-09-02 20:36:30
depth3
children6
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value3.337 HBD
curator_payout_value1.078 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length681
author_reputation177,167,275,265,899
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,188
net_rshares4,883,303,608,689
author_curate_reward""
vote details (18)
@markrmorrisjr ·
What your saying is, the hope of an author to regularly collect big money goes down. Meanwhile, it was stated that a single vote would be worth more, so please explain how that closes any gap. It seems to me that fewer posts will payout at all. but, I don't know a lot about the technology.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t214800071z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:48:00
last_update2016-09-02 21:48:00
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length290
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,022
net_rshares6,679,499,308
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@marquismiller · (edited)
@ned These ideas might help in this particular circumstance:

1. RobinHood and others similar to this community:
If this 5 vote a day is implemented, it might be important to balance out by allowing Whales to redistribute their voting power. This can help groups like them still seek to help find the unfounded, but would probably require more members in this particular case.

2. More of a headsup from what I've been reading throughout the site:
It's important to note that many of the hot topics in Steemit are anarchic and libertarian-based, so it might damage investments as well as faith from the crowd who sort of find it iffy or discouraging when they see their votes limited - the thing they want to avoid when it comes to cryptocurrency living. Liberation in a sense that people can help people out, like in the paragraph above, can balance out the turmoil.


3. This is just an idea I just figured might or might not help:
What happens if the rules changed a bit and allowed your author posting per day and your time of existence help improve your voting power? Or at least increase voting reception percentages from a vote? The latter might  or might not get rid of the ranging and sliding of one's voting, by simply allowing the power of the vote become natural and automatic depending on the author's activity.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormarquismiller
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t044836577z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned"]}
created2016-09-03 04:48:45
last_update2016-09-03 04:50:45
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,324
author_reputation138,987,245,257
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,514
net_rshares3,112,268,248
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@pfunk · (edited)
$7.31
As a frequent voter on Steemit I can tell you reducing vote target to 5/day is a terrible proposal. Some people spend more than 20 minutes a day enjoying this site, and voting shouldn't be catered to just the people who vote once in a while. That's catering **inversely** to user-engagement, or if you'll accept a new concept: time-stake. 

 It will also dramatically increase the cognitive load on voting decision, something the 40/day target fixed very well.  Maybe you never experienced it, but when each vote used 5% of voting power, it was becoming a pain in the ass to decide what to vote for even with much less content that there is on Steemit today.

Edit: Another thing I thought about while upvoting comments that question this change in this post. Comment voting will be hurt as well. I frequently upvote quality comments but would have to cease if votes were targeted at just 5 per day. How ridiculous is that?

 Again, this is penalizing people who are actually engaged on Steemit. I shouldn't have to explain what engagement is worth to a website.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorpfunk
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t212736197z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:27:54
last_update2016-09-02 22:04:51
depth3
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value6.150 HBD
curator_payout_value1.159 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,062
author_reputation221,632,045,904,452
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,775
net_rshares7,670,908,598,580
author_curate_reward""
vote details (31)
@webdeals · (edited)
I think that in this way you are creating more discrepancy... will be 2 o 3 well paid posts and all the rest ignored!  I think it is one of the worse ever thing you have done! Sorry! As I said in an other comment... I am not the best ever blogger but I am 100% sure I will not get anymore upvotes anyway I got normally 50 70 90 upvotes per post!
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorwebdeals
permlinkre-ned-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t223239253z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:32:42
last_update2016-09-02 22:43:54
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length345
author_reputation410,373,804,154,165
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,525
net_rshares13,769,855,655
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@noisy ·
$0.55
is that mean, that if I vote only once per day, my vote will have **8 greater value?**
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authornoisy
permlinkre-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195228138z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:52:27
last_update2016-09-02 19:52:27
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.418 HBD
curator_payout_value0.130 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length86
author_reputation59,974,373,499,600
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,640
net_rshares1,065,972,043,296
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@neoxian ·
I'm not sure..
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorneoxian
permlinkre-noisy-re-neoxian-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195203835z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:53:03
last_update2016-09-02 19:53:03
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length14
author_reputation167,518,222,673,938
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,652
net_rshares261,762,788
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@on0tole ·
$0.02
I would like to know who will be the escrow agent? For example, I spent more than 30 p2p deals exchange SD/STEEM for the currency. For transactions with those who did not trust me, I have used third-party Escrow services, I would be interested to be an Escrow agent, since I have a great many years of experience in p2p exchange and high reliability in community.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authoron0tole
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220238636z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:02:42
last_update2016-09-02 22:02:42
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.018 HBD
curator_payout_value0.006 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length363
author_reputation951,865,524,120
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,166
net_rshares61,254,858,713
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@oumar ·
$1.25
Oooh man! Lots of changes, the "Target Votes of 5 per Day instead of 40" will definetly cut the rewards since people will be using their votes more selectively.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authoroumar
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t201444442z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:14:45
last_update2016-09-02 20:14:45
depth1
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.130 HBD
curator_payout_value0.123 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length160
author_reputation3,866,019,128,933
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,936
net_rshares2,040,564,243,874
author_curate_reward""
vote details (11)
@smooth ·
The total rewards per day are constant. This only affects how they are distributed.
properties (22)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-oumar-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t214656000z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:46:57
last_update2016-09-02 21:46:57
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length83
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,008
net_rshares0
@bacchist ·
I'm very concerned that "fewer overall votes" will mean "fewer people receiving votes"
properties (22)
authorbacchist
permlinkre-smooth-re-oumar-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t004613703z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 00:46:12
last_update2016-09-03 00:46:12
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length86
author_reputation85,392,357,715,964
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,786
net_rshares0
@pcste ·
There was i. thinking the site was finally getting easier to use with todays improvements, and know i find its going to be more  complex to use again.

personally i think steemit needs far more votes distributing SP to more users instead of less votes giving more SP to less users. 

Also what about low and mid SP holders? when i vote, the poster gets very little (if anything). so i am going to be disuaded from voting much cos i will only give reward to 5 users? 
Surely steemit needs to find a way to reward more users with SP so they can vote and curate more .we need more SP distributed to minnows and new users so there are more curators with SP power to curate and feed new users SP so the cycle continues. 

Surely this new idea will do the opposite. There are already more people posting than curating, because they are trying to get SP. If you are a whale you do not have to post to get a decent reward, you can get that from curating.

Minnows have to post and post and post to get reward. theres already too many posts with too few getting revenue, so theres not much incentive for minnows or low earners to curate. I'm on this site most of everyday, i could curate and vote so much if i had enough SP to reward posters.

If more new users got reward and the wealth was distributed more evenly. it would bring down the ridiculous amount some posts are recieving and more posts would recieve a reward. this in turn would hopefully lead people to write more realistic content because they wouldn't be just trying to come up with whatever they believe is going to make them rich in 1 post.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpcste
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t031636681z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:16:36
last_update2016-09-03 03:16:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,599
author_reputation112,529,675,837,494
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,749
net_rshares8,637,748,366
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@pcste · (edited)
Its becoming obvious that most people including myself don't trully understand the 5 vote issue correctly and that in itself is a problem. this site suffers from severe lack of ease of use.

Its becoming obvious this site was made unfinished and without a specific goal or direction.  cryptocurrency is already a volatile system and people quickly lose faith in constant changes and tinkering. 

If i made a website for clients and it wasnt running correctly and then every few weeks i said 'hey ive got an new idea'  lets add this or this, then nobody would ever ask me to build  a website.

Please dont get me wrong, i love steemit and really want it to work (ive been on all day every day for 5 weeks ffs) but all these changes are not inspiring confidence to outside investors and new users.

Personaly i think the site needs get its front end finalised and  whales need more votes therefore distributing to more users. and lower SP users should have more weight when voting cos they are likely to vote on more minnows therefore distributing more SP
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpcste
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t042624125z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 04:26:24
last_update2016-09-03 04:31:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,053
author_reputation112,529,675,837,494
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,302
net_rshares2,275,486,249
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@peterz ·
The new upvote button doesn't work for me at all. That is, when I click upvote, the slider pops up, I can move it, but clicking upvote in this popup has no effect. It's Safari 9.0.2 on OSX 10.11.2
properties (22)
authorpeterz
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160904t004738473z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-04 00:47:36
last_update2016-09-04 00:47:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length196
author_reputation2,142,149,251,082
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,117,600
net_rshares0
@picokernel ·
I am very pleased with your work. I am particularly interested in the SBD stability plan! I would very much appreciate it if you went further into detail on it. The escrow feature also has huge implications. 

P.S. Should votes per user be a witness variable?
properties (22)
authorpicokernel
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195147412z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:52:09
last_update2016-09-02 19:52:09
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length259
author_reputation17,498,320,798,649
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,637
net_rshares0
@princewahaj · (edited)
$1.94
Edited: If daily payouts will remain same, then it might not be an issue. I think we must give this new change a little time but overall, whales must re-consider OR at-least get ready to change this rule if it do not works properly. Only time will tell.

I feel very stressed after reading this announcement. Basically, I am struggling to make my votes worth some decent money but it is now limited to 5 at 100% voting power. Lets suppose now that if with time, my votes value increase to $1 per vote, then that means I can only spend $5 in a whole day. Do you think it is justified? Absolutely, NO. 

All our efforts for reaching to  20,000 SP (20,000 SP needed currently for $1 worth of vote) will worth only $5 per day to spend which is absolutely a dust. If the idea is to encourage others for purchasing more steem power, then you always have other things to do like offering more features specially for high SP users which will encourage other users to buy more SP to enjoy those features but all I see is, taking the name of bot and implementing new changes on expense of real-human curators.

Just like @donkeypong said above, this will destroy steemit's concept in no time. OMG! 5 votes!!! I still can't believe me eyes. I didn't really expect such things from such kind of smart people. Steemit might lose its active members due to this change. People might only vote for reputable members who often hit the trending page in greed of curation reward and whales who have voting power of $100, if divide by 10% voting power, will make it $10. What a mess! It means, new minnows might never reach to any milestone, steemit will be a less fun, and very few posts will cross even $1,000 which actually was an inspiration for bloggers to reach, but now it might be a dream.

The idea behind this change looks like a capitalism economic system where rich person will become more richer and poor more poorer (or poor will stay poor). And through this post, I just want my message to reach steem developers. Re-consider what you just announced.

Anyways, I apologize if I used any inappropriate word above. I am hoping that steem-team could look at the suggestions because I believe in steemit and I love to browse steemit and spend most of my time here. This is just my opinion just like all other people stated their opinions.

P.S: If I'm missing something, let me know please.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorprincewahaj
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t135206328z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["donkeypong"]}
created2016-09-03 13:52:03
last_update2016-09-03 14:15:54
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.459 HBD
curator_payout_value0.482 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,381
author_reputation78,034,727,885,376
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,111,203
net_rshares2,804,033,811,027
author_curate_reward""
vote details (14)
@queenmountain ·
I am an author here on Steem and I like to upvote because it is fun. When I browse around and read stuff I vote on it because I like it. I don't care if its 5 minutes old or 5 days old. If I started to feel "penalized" because I was upvoting, it would take the fun out of it for me. It sucks that people or bots abuse the voting system, but I couldn't imagine the 5 vote rule making newbies or established Steemians want to curate. My 2 cents.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorqueenmountain
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t215715228z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:57:15
last_update2016-09-02 21:57:15
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length443
author_reputation55,098,234,982,093
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,114
net_rshares2,348,889,031
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@recursive ·
> linearly **interpolated** from 2%-5% market cap

FTFY
properties (22)
authorrecursive
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t123840576z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 12:37:30
last_update2016-09-03 12:37:30
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length55
author_reputation14,577,151,751,433
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,110,538
net_rshares0
@richardcrill ·
I have made two escrow transfers but can't seem to approve or release them. Is there someone that can help me with that?
properties (22)
authorrichardcrill
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20170424t011847146z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-04-24 01:18:48
last_update2017-04-24 01:18:48
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-05-01 01:18:48
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length120
author_reputation55,974,657,421,087
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id3,096,543
net_rshares0
@richardjuckes ·
$0.09
Couldn't you find another way to limit the bots? Off the top of my head:
- give everybody 10 votes/day
- have yet another bot posting three images,  once, twice, or three times a day: one pretty picture, one fortune cookie, one captcha ....
- replying with the captcha gets you more votes
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorrichardjuckes
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t050307459z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 05:03:06
last_update2016-09-03 05:03:06
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.068 HBD
curator_payout_value0.022 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length288
author_reputation34,384,684,876,528
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,629
net_rshares213,633,660,947
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@liberosist · (edited)
$0.09
Yes, there are many ways to fight the bots. Limiting everyone is not it. If anything now we'll have a greater swarm of bots.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorliberosist
permlinkre-richardjuckes-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t082222279z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 08:22:45
last_update2016-09-03 08:23:03
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.093 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length124
author_reputation177,167,275,265,899
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,931
net_rshares218,250,953,946
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@roelandp ·
$0.82
I may not fully understand steem and the rewards, but i have been reading up on it and I think i have grasped it a bit. 

<b>What about moving to the Flattr model?</b> Where everyone has a voting stake depending on their SteemPower. The more you vote the less each vote weighs? Calculated backwards based on per person voting activity the past 24 hours. Or was this the case all along?

If every rolling 24 hours there is X amount of rewards to be distributed depending on total SP / MVests. And I have Y/X't weight in this total X. The more votes I make the more the (my part) Y get chopped up amongst all votes I made that day? Not sure if this all changes anything ..... 

Somehow I feel that implementing a vote-weight slider is just an alternative way of moving from 40 minimum votes to 5 maximum votes and if the above mentioned 'flattr model' is already how it works, than by moving the voting slider to 12.5% you can still bring your 40 votes as it was before right?

<b>All  in all I think the new 'home' feed redirection is a great way forward to dedicate more attention by default to unread and new items!</b>
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorroelandp
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t000634014z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 00:06:33
last_update2016-09-03 00:06:33
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.818 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,120
author_reputation662,943,317,989,456
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,499
net_rshares1,472,181,383,596
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@smooth ·
What you described is pretty close to exactly how it works.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-roelandp-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t003446700z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 00:34:48
last_update2016-09-03 00:34:48
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length59
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,713
net_rshares2,569,097,378
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@roman-dikanev ·
There is progress - and it pleases!
properties (22)
authorroman-dikanev
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t204143587z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:41:45
last_update2016-09-02 20:41:45
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length35
author_reputation26,594,784,527
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,257
net_rshares0
@seyacat ·
If power of the vote is not linearly distributed to steempower?
Que tal si el poder del voto no se reparte linealmente al steempower?
http://www.seyanim.com/uimage/ul/1472314110.png
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorseyacat
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220903604z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"image":["http://www.seyanim.com/uimage/ul/1472314110.png"]}
created2016-09-02 22:09:03
last_update2016-09-02 22:09:03
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length181
author_reputation180,757,429,891
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,227
net_rshares825,407,102
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@seyacat ·
What if there were special tags for language "es" "cn " " ru" they had a specific distribution of steempower ?
Que tal si existieran tags especiales por lenguaje "es" "cn" "ru" que tuvieran una reparticiΓ³n especifica de steempower?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorseyacat
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t221323561z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:13:24
last_update2016-09-02 22:13:24
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length231
author_reputation180,757,429,891
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,282
net_rshares809,222,649
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@knircky ·
i think that is not a good idea. i think instead this should be done in a positive manner vs a negative. I.e. there could be money that gets distributed to a certain topic, like a language in order to promote it. this money however should come from outside and could be a guarantee or bounty on top of normal distribution. To me the promotional money could be used for this much more effectively.
properties (22)
authorknircky
permlinkre-seyacat-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t035726507z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:57:24
last_update2016-09-03 03:57:24
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length396
author_reputation212,905,587,244,262
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,107,064
net_rshares0
@seyacat ·
I love than home opens on feed and not in trending.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorseyacat
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t222412554z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:24:12
last_update2016-09-02 22:24:12
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length51
author_reputation180,757,429,891
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,430
net_rshares3,314,587,442
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@psychonaut ·
As someone following a grand total of one person, I don't like it so much.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-seyacat-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t091134600z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 09:11:36
last_update2016-09-03 09:11:36
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length74
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,235
net_rshares2,348,889,031
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@shenanigator · (edited)
$0.65
I'm almost done putting together the Steemit FAQ. Can you please elaborate on the voting power changes so I can alter it accordingly?

Here's how that section of the FAQ currently reads:

# What is Voting Power?
Think of your voting power as a big tank of water. Every time you vote, a valve at the bottom of the tank pops open and squirts out some power. The fuller the tank, the more power squirts out the valve. The amount of power that squirts out the valve is one of the things that determines how powerful your vote is. (The other is your Steem Power, which you can look up in your wallet and is an entirely separate thing.)

If you vote and vote and vote without stopping, it's like leaving the valve open, and it won't take long before your tank is empty.

Fortunately for you, there is a steady drip of power coming back into your tank! This drip refills your tank at the same rate, always, no matter what. What happens to the drip if your tank is full? The water gets wasted! Think of it like the tank just overflows if it's full; all that voting power just dripping down the sides going to no purpose.

## How voting power works:
- Your account has a number between 0 and 100 called "voting power."
- When you vote for a post, slightly more than a 200th of that voting power gets "spent" on your vote.
- Your voting power regenerates over time at a fixed rate of about 1 point every 100 minutes.

## How to vote optimally:
- In general, you should never vote less than about 27 times per day. If you do vote less, you're letting your voting power go to waste (because your "tank" is full some of that time, and the "drip" is spilling over the brim).
- Surprising news: if you want to maximize your total influence, it doesn't matter how much you vote, as long as you vote more than about 27 times per day. Your overall influence is the same whether you vote 1000 times per day or 27 because of the constant drip of voting power filling your tank.
- However, The more you vote, the less each of your votes is worth. So you could vote 1000 time​s per day, but each of those votes wouldn't be worth very much. Your total influence would be optimal, but your power per vote would be relatively tiny.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorshenanigator
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194923072z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:49:15
last_update2016-09-02 19:56:27
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.501 HBD
curator_payout_value0.144 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,206
author_reputation61,400,000,740,515
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,602
net_rshares1,218,881,077,640
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@proglobyte ·
errr... is this still accurate?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorproglobyte
permlinkre-shenanigator-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t200111221z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:01:15
last_update2016-09-02 20:01:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length31
author_reputation1,197,561,591,531
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,781
net_rshares192,941,707
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@smooth ·
Will at least new Steemit-created accounts set password recovery to steemit by default? This is almost certainly what most social media users want and they won't know to opt-in until it is too late.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t212900900z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:29:03
last_update2016-09-02 21:29:03
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length198
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,792
net_rshares20,639,407,371
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@jsteck ·
I don't know what that means but I think yes that's what I want, if it's easier for us
properties (22)
authorjsteck
permlinkre-smooth-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t015555435z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:55:54
last_update2016-09-03 01:55:54
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length86
author_reputation1,385,142,756,985
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,248
net_rshares0
@sponge-bob ·
Yeah.  This could actually kill Steemit.   As a very new investor here,  I have kept detailed voting records to see if 20% on the slider renders the same earnings for the same effort.  Not even close.   

A shame really because I was just onboarding people to the network based on a FIXED SET OF RULES to play within.   But now, by comparison, I guess 2-pair beats 3-of-a-kind.    I'll wait a few weeks, then vote with my power down. 

It has been fun.   I am so glad I ran into this post before locking in several more bitcoins.
properties (22)
authorsponge-bob
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160907t165836443z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-07 16:58:36
last_update2016-09-07 16:58:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length529
author_reputation265,538,240,643,519
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,160,921
net_rshares0
@steemship · (edited)
$0.37
I'm just sad. This isn't the Steemit that I know. Trying to control people and control votes is wrong. This 5-vote thing is a punitive change with window dressing, and frankly I thought we were better than this. 

@stellabelle and @donkeypong had a wonderful chat about this proposal in one of our channels. It's private, but how I wish I could just cut and paste right here what @stellabelle said.  

You guys need to hire @stellabelle to work in your HQ building. That woman has so much passion for life, so much tenderness, and so much grit. She understands what a writer needs to work effectively and she knows what true curation work involves.  She also depends on Steemit to make a living. 

This change is a slap in the face to people like her and her dreams for building something real. I join nearly every major Steemit writer (just check these comments) in registering my opposition to the 5-vote change.

Peace, Richard
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorsteemship
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t071342608z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["stellabelle","donkeypong"]}
created2016-09-03 07:14:00
last_update2016-09-03 07:16:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.336 HBD
curator_payout_value0.033 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length930
author_reputation70,083,642,919,654
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,497
net_rshares763,998,808,952
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@steevc ·
Where do we set the password recovery agent?

What's happened to the personal Feed? That's my first stop on Steemit
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorsteevc
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194039624z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:40:39
last_update2016-09-02 19:40:39
depth1
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length115
author_reputation1,390,482,969,848,652
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,499
net_rshares54,503,512
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@kenny-crane ·
On our personal feed, it looks to me like it has been moved to the Home sub menu.
properties (22)
authorkenny-crane
permlinkre-steevc-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195534838z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:55:33
last_update2016-09-02 19:55:33
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length81
author_reputation236,428,989,397,606
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,689
net_rshares0
@steevc ·
$0.04
Ah, didn't notice that menu had changed. We get used to a certain way of seeing things. Cheers
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorsteevc
permlinkre-kenny-crane-re-steevc-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195722520z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:57:21
last_update2016-09-02 19:57:21
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.036 HBD
curator_payout_value0.006 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length94
author_reputation1,390,482,969,848,652
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,723
net_rshares101,131,637,953
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@stellabelle · (edited)
$0.40
For the future, I'd like to suggest that steemit.com creates a filter mechanism like @dana-edwards created: https://steemit.com/steem/@dana-edwards/an-approach-for-dealing-with-harassment-on-steemit-selective-channels
As far as your current adjustments go, escrow and the Savings Account are great improvements as well as the voting numbers. But why 5? From 40 to 10 would make more sense, unless I am missing the logic behind choosing 5.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195546268z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["dana-edwards"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@dana-edwards/an-approach-for-dealing-with-harassment-on-steemit-selective-channels"]}
created2016-09-02 19:55:45
last_update2016-09-02 19:59:06
depth1
children7
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.304 HBD
curator_payout_value0.093 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length438
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,692
net_rshares815,332,371,527
author_curate_reward""
vote details (13)
@proglobyte · (edited)
Decentralization exists for free speech, free exchange and free expression in all forms - this should be looked upon as sacrosanct!  Gagging people, or making perspectives that we do not agree with, invisible to us, is for the corporate, centralized Social Media .. not STEEMIT.

There are incentives in-place, and mechanisms where bad behaviour is met with immediate negative sanction, not exiling and shunning, but rather guide posts by which they can find their way back into society, and although they may still disagree, they are forced to find increasingly improved and effective ways to be heard, an opportunity to learn and grow and to redeem oneself.

In short:  Filtering is elitist bullshit - people who would walk down a city street, and instead of enjoying the beautiful mess that the noisy, smelly, often outspoken and sometimes unpredictable,  people they share the city with, would make them disappear if they could.

*BOOM!*
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorproglobyte
permlinkre-stellabelle-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t200801885z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:08:06
last_update2016-09-02 20:10:54
depth2
children6
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length941
author_reputation1,197,561,591,531
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,866
net_rshares29,723,626,577
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@clevecross ·
This is not a proposal to hide content from others, but block it from individual eyes. I should be able to block user_x in a way that allows everyone to see that they have said, but it is filtered from my view
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorclevecross
permlinkre-proglobyte-re-stellabelle-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t214758494z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:47:57
last_update2016-09-02 21:47:57
depth3
children5
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length209
author_reputation7,635,074,529,912
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,020
net_rshares154,353,365
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@tee-em ·
$0.14
This may be a stupid question,  but do you still accrue the 10% interest if your steem is in the savings account?
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authortee-em
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194516833z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:45:18
last_update2016-09-02 19:45:18
depth1
children7
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.124 HBD
curator_payout_value0.013 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length113
author_reputation12,706,667,096,470
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,561
net_rshares316,875,530,233
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@jesta · (edited)
I believe so, I've actually seen conversations about making it so the 10% SBD interest only applies IF your SBD is in the "savings account" - though I'm not sure if that's part of this.
properties (22)
authorjesta
permlinkre-tee-em-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195325982z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:53:27
last_update2016-09-02 19:53:39
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length185
author_reputation140,605,453,893,072
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,657
net_rshares0
@razvanelulmarin ·
i support this. great idea!
properties (22)
authorrazvanelulmarin
permlinkre-jesta-re-tee-em-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220746977z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:08:03
last_update2016-09-02 22:08:03
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length27
author_reputation176,753,416,199,361
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,207
net_rshares0
@noisy ·
$0.52
this is very good question!
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authornoisy
permlinkre-tee-em-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t195433926z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:54:33
last_update2016-09-02 19:54:33
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.388 HBD
curator_payout_value0.128 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length27
author_reputation59,974,373,499,600
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,670
net_rshares1,015,852,235,984
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@proskynneo ·
Yes. Steem Dollars will accrue interest both in and out of the savings account. The savings account is a security feature.
properties (22)
authorproskynneo
permlinkre-tee-em-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t202535024z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:25:33
last_update2016-09-02 20:25:33
depth2
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length122
author_reputation4,454,785,474,512
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,049
net_rshares0
@razvanelulmarin ·
why not make it -in savings account only - wouldn't that make more sense?
properties (22)
authorrazvanelulmarin
permlinkre-proskynneo-re-tee-em-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t220811576z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:08:27
last_update2016-09-02 22:08:27
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length73
author_reputation176,753,416,199,361
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,216
net_rshares0
@the-alien ·
$2.11
Usually, you will never see me voicing a opinion on these changes, because I trust you guys and I just try to help focusing on the stuff that I'm better at.

Judging by the long list of comments I can understand why people are concerned. So if I may a small suggestion:

Is there any way we can have the changes incrementally decreasing, and gage from there. Or even if the point is to spread the voting power from the whales to the community, isn't it there some way to do it more gradually?

Usually drastic decisions and big changes happen as answer to an imminent crisis, maybe there is one and that's the best decision, I don't know.

What I can say is that personally I much prefer some gradual changes  instead of reducing votes to only 5 per post.

These are my two cents for what it's worth, in case you guys are still looking for feedback.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorthe-alien
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t000542362z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 00:05:48
last_update2016-09-03 00:05:48
depth1
children3
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.583 HBD
curator_payout_value0.523 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length849
author_reputation251,563,251,411,297
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,495
net_rshares2,971,226,008,846
author_curate_reward""
vote details (12)
@donkeypong · (edited)
Your comment is right on the money, Adil. A lot of us who don't normally comment on these things are pretty steemed (or steemy eyed) about this proposal. 

I thought they were better than this. I really did. Hopefully, it's a one-time mistake and we can go back to some sanity soon.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authordonkeypong
permlinkre-the-alien-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t074742541z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 07:48:00
last_update2016-09-03 07:48:51
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length282
author_reputation431,667,636,679,304
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,108,689
net_rshares4,504,676,097
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@the-alien ·
As I said, I usually never comment on these things, and try to abstain and help without asking questions.

The only way I know to solve problems and disagreements is to offer something else to help make it work peacefully, but at the same time, I really don't wanna overstep in people's plates, but since the feedback is asked this is my take on it:

 I hope that there are other ways to address the situation without resorting to this, and in exchange we can help out to make it work? Something else we can do to pull our weight? Whatever you need that we can do to help deal with whatever problem that needs to be solved.

Maybe there is some impending crisis that we don't see that caused this drastic decision, people have their reasons, so maybe there is something we can help with to compensate? Guys, just ask and we have your back! At least some of us will.

We have a great community here I hope that we can only keep growing :)
properties (22)
authorthe-alien
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-the-alien-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t085525373z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 08:55:33
last_update2016-09-03 08:55:33
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length937
author_reputation251,563,251,411,297
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,120
net_rshares0
@jsteck ·
Trust but verify
properties (22)
authorjsteck
permlinkre-the-alien-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t014949779z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:49:48
last_update2016-09-03 01:49:48
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length16
author_reputation1,385,142,756,985
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,212
net_rshares0
@the-ego-is-you · (edited)
How about making it so that voting on the lesser read posts and perhaps also on less read steemit users didn't deteriorate voting power as fast? 

Maybe even slightly increase the curration payout from such posts?

That might prevent a circle jerk / simon says culture where curators just follow the money trail. 

I loved this update though.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorthe-ego-is-you
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t210056175z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 21:00:57
last_update2016-09-02 21:06:24
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length342
author_reputation7,031,347,556,614
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,451
net_rshares54,503,512
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@tinyhomeliving ·
Well I am not upvoting this post because my voting power will go down haha, also I am not sure what the heck that bar is, I understand percentages but what is this?  I like what the devs  have done so far but I am disappointed with having to monitor my votes now.  I like to spread the love and upvote people that need votes for good and unrecognized content, this will give me less incentive to do so.  I like this site for 2 things - sharing myself through posts and reading other peoples posts and interacting, the 5 votes situation diminishes that because it discourages interaction and supporting others.  My 2 cents.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authortinyhomeliving
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t032726232z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 03:27:33
last_update2016-09-03 03:27:33
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length622
author_reputation13,322,550,598,055
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,818
net_rshares2,348,889,031
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@trev ·
Gotta say I strongly hate the voting slider. Voting needs to be made simpler as it was, not more complicated
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authortrev
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t003542926z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 00:35:48
last_update2016-09-03 00:35:48
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length108
author_reputation897,525,050,120
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,105,719
net_rshares17,915,723,306
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@jsteck ·
Agreed. No slider. Yes/No/Flag.
properties (22)
authorjsteck
permlinkre-trev-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t014912529z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 01:49:12
last_update2016-09-03 01:49:12
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length31
author_reputation1,385,142,756,985
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,106,205
net_rshares0
@venuspcs ·
$0.31
Enable Whales to Gift a percentage of their SP to Minnows.....[like I proposed here](https://steemit.com/steemit/@venuspcs/distribution-of-steem-power-via-gifting-to-create-a-more-level-playing-field-my-2-cents).
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorvenuspcs
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194702799z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steemit/@venuspcs/distribution-of-steem-power-via-gifting-to-create-a-more-level-playing-field-my-2-cents"]}
created2016-09-02 19:47:06
last_update2016-09-02 19:47:06
depth1
children4
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.245 HBD
curator_payout_value0.062 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length212
author_reputation30,491,473,006,755
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,583
net_rshares653,379,962,341
author_curate_reward""
vote details (13)
@jesta ·
I've seen a lot of conversations around ways to boost minnow powers, I don't think any of them will make this version though. There's still much debate around the issue and preventing the ability to game the system.
properties (22)
authorjesta
permlinkre-venuspcs-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t201013784z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:10:12
last_update2016-09-02 20:10:12
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length215
author_reputation140,605,453,893,072
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,892
net_rshares0
@venuspcs ·
I think I have laid out a possible way to allow it without it being gamed.

A. Allow only Whales (over 100,000 SP) to "Gift" their SP
B. Require the "gifted SP" be 1/2 their total SP
C. Require the "gifted SP" to be equally distributed amongst 100 Minnows (could be randomly picked by the system or hand picked by the whale)
D. Require that no "gifted SP" goes to someone with 10k SP or higher. (Should prevent multiple whales Gifting the same minnows)
E. Make the "Gifted SP" part of the giftee's total SP: non-transferable or withdrawable (power down) EVER!
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorvenuspcs
permlinkre-jesta-re-venuspcs-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t202128996z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 20:21:30
last_update2016-09-02 20:21:30
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length559
author_reputation30,491,473,006,755
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,103,003
net_rshares9,888,929,685
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@psychonaut ·
Now here's a proposal we can all agree with!
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorpsychonaut
permlinkre-venuspcs-re-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160903t090717000z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-03 09:07:18
last_update2016-09-03 09:07:18
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length44
author_reputation1,601,253,573,394
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,109,197
net_rshares2,422,291,814
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@webdeals · (edited)
I am not a great blogger considering the upvotes I get. If you will create 5 upvotes/person means that people will not upvote at all! I suppose there is another way to fight the bots. In this way I suppose a lot of REAL people like me that didn't have so much luck at part the 115 followers...  will be demotivated writing because if we are 70k including bots... nobody more will upvote :(
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorwebdeals
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t222448695z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 22:24:54
last_update2016-09-02 22:45:51
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length389
author_reputation410,373,804,154,165
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,104,440
net_rshares7,271,979,797
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@xomtux ·
Escrow is an interesting service and I'm eager to see how it will be used by the community.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorxomtux
permlinkre-steemitblog-announcing-steem-0-14-0-release-candidate-20160902t194111235z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-09-02 19:41:12
last_update2016-09-02 19:41:12
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-10-04 01:16:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length91
author_reputation7,805,684,953
root_title"Announcing Steem 0.14.0 Release Candidate"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,102,501
net_rshares618,292,885
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)