RE: I submitted my first hardfork pull request to the Steem blockchain! (Updates to the SBD print rate.) by inertia

View this thread on: hive.blog | peakd.com | ecency.com

Viewing a response to: @timcliff/i-submitted-my-first-hardfork-pull-request-to-the-steem-blockchain-updates-to-the-sbd-print-rate

steem · @inertia · May 29 '18

$0.44

I like the initiative, but I haven't been convinced that anything should be done to restore the peg at all.  I'm not sure we need anything more than a soft-peg.

👍 timcliff, edb, nazars

`author`	inertia
`permlink`	re-timcliff-i-submitted-my-first-hardfork-pull-request-to-the-steem-blockchain-updates-to-the-sbd-print-rate-20180529t000439930z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
`created`	2018-05-29 00:04:39
`last_update`	2018-05-29 00:04:39
`depth`	1
`children`	6
`last_payout`	2018-06-05 00:04:39
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.344 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.101 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	160
`author_reputation`	346,568,901,399,561
`root_title`	"I submitted my first hardfork pull request to the Steem blockchain! (Updates to the SBD print rate.)"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	58,190,717
`net_rshares`	110,537,047,863
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (3)

voter	rshares	pct
timcliff	98,235,120,007	13%
edb	12,301,927,856	50%
nazars	0	100%

@timcliff · May 29 '18

$0.08

By itself this change is not really going to fix the peg. The majority of the time the debt ratio is such that this change will not make any difference. It mainly eliminates the reduced SBD supply during times when the debt ratio is above 2%. The past few times when this has occurred, it hasn’t made economic sense.

👍 the-ego-is-you

`author`	timcliff
`permlink`	re-inertia-re-timcliff-i-submitted-my-first-hardfork-pull-request-to-the-steem-blockchain-updates-to-the-sbd-print-rate-20180529t003147701z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
`created`	2018-05-29 00:31:48
`last_update`	2018-05-29 00:31:48
`depth`	2
`children`	5
`last_payout`	2018-06-05 00:31:48
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.063 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.019 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	316
`author_reputation`	272,954,445,077,789
`root_title`	"I submitted my first hardfork pull request to the Steem blockchain! (Updates to the SBD print rate.)"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	58,193,477
`net_rshares`	20,915,567,772
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (1)

voter	weight	wgt%	rshares	pct	time
the-ego-is-you	0 B		20,915,567,772	100%

@inertia · May 29 '18

$0.22

Certainly, you're not saying that this change will have no effect whatsoever.  If you were saying that, then this change should not be done.

We think the number of times this ratio has presented itself lately, it has worked against the peg.  I haven't seen any numbers to support this assertion.  One could show that the *supply* was affected adversely.  That's academic and I'm not talking about that.  I'm wondering if there is any way to show that SBD buying power was affected adversely by black-swan protection code.  I don't think that can be demonstrated.  There's too much volatility.

So, in reality, this change is to affect a *perceived* issue.  And that's what I haven't been convinced about.

👍 timcliff

`author`	inertia
`permlink`	re-timcliff-re-inertia-re-timcliff-i-submitted-my-first-hardfork-pull-request-to-the-steem-blockchain-updates-to-the-sbd-print-rate-20180529t005853714z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
`created`	2018-05-29 00:58:54
`last_update`	2018-05-29 00:58:54
`depth`	3
`children`	4
`last_payout`	2018-06-05 00:58:54
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.170 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.054 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	705
`author_reputation`	346,568,901,399,561
`root_title`	"I submitted my first hardfork pull request to the Steem blockchain! (Updates to the SBD print rate.)"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	58,196,085
`net_rshares`	56,193,835,477
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (1)

voter	weight	wgt%	rshares	pct	time
timcliff	0 B		56,193,835,477	7%

@timcliff · May 29 '18

$0.08

All I was saying is that the broken peg is a much bigger issue, and this one change alone isn't going to fix it.

The real protection against the "black swan" event is the 10% 'haircut' which is unaffected by this change.

Rather than argue for the change though, I will argue against the converse. In a case like we have today, why is it good to be giving authors a portion of their rewards as STEEM? Wouldn't it be better if they were receiving SBD instead?

👍 the-ego-is-you

`author`	timcliff
`permlink`	re-inertia-re-timcliff-re-inertia-re-timcliff-i-submitted-my-first-hardfork-pull-request-to-the-steem-blockchain-updates-to-the-sbd-print-rate-20180529t024256057z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
`created`	2018-05-29 02:42:18
`last_update`	2018-05-29 02:42:18
`depth`	4
`children`	3
`last_payout`	2018-06-05 02:42:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.061 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.019 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	459
`author_reputation`	272,954,445,077,789
`root_title`	"I submitted my first hardfork pull request to the Steem blockchain! (Updates to the SBD print rate.)"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	58,206,221
`net_rshares`	20,518,436,738
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (1)

voter	weight	wgt%	rshares	pct	time
the-ego-is-you	0 B		20,518,436,738	100%

3 replies