You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: My understanding and thoughts regarding this ongoing witness battle
I think especially new accounts should have less Influence on Witnesses if they recently powered up big amounts of SP. Also there should be a hardcap that only allows to have a maximum of 10% of influence in the community no matter how much SP one has.
I support this. but it is a bit tricky. This will ensure even more decentralization but opens room for a large stakeholder to split stake between accounts to achieve the same thing we're trying to prevent. Would be interesting to give this more thought though.
I recently wrote a post about a formula im developing. Its far from finished and just a rough idea (dont even know if it works that way with Steem), but i think this could be interesting:
https://steempeak.com/steem/@remotehorst23/steem-blockchain-has-a-major-problem-and-maybe-the-solution-is-pretty-easy
i will take a look at it in the morning. Thank you
What about a timed/delayed power up time (2-14 days)? So if something happens like this again, we can reach out to those users (exchanges) before they vote in the sock puppets/take over the chain.
Thanks for your Question!
I think, delayed power uptime would only solve this problem for exchanges, but we need to expect that this can also happen from individuals and also if they split the votepower on many accounts this probably would be under the radar.
Voters either need to be identified or trusted. I would prefer the latter.
Ya, it seems once it gets down into many smaller accounts this would definitely be harder to track unless the voting behavior was identical/unanimous and same times etc.