You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Should SBD Be a Pegged Asset? If So, When Should We Peg It?
Or! ... The witnesses wanting this shit could come together and create a THIRD, off-chain, dollar-pegged currency and hop the fuck off SBD. :) Just a thought ;)
It just makes me so mad that a FREE, DE-centralized (not centralized) community is SO quick to hop on a controlled, socialist-like mentality to try and regulate shit - exactly which was supposed to be PREVENTED on this DE-centralized platform. It makes me sick.
@boobysteem if you want "free market" for SBD then lets remove the bail-out rule for SBD. let's see how long it lasts next time it drops below 1 $..
In case you haven't noticed Steem has to be printed every time the SBD drops below 1$.to keep it afloat. The SBD is already a regulated coin, just a poorly regulated one.
Dan, which I have immense respect for, got 2 things wrong with SBD : 1- the SBD peg isn't working as the WhitePaper envisioned . 2- the reverse converse is not exploitable anymore in the way the Whitepaper describes
Have you read the white paper? Do you know it was written mostly by an anarcho-capitalist (Dan Larimer) who is not, at all, a fan of the "socialist-like mentality" you're describing? What's the point of creating another currency that is pegged with two unpegged, speculative currencies? Do you realize how confusing that would be and how much coding effort would be involved?
If you understood the conversion mechanisms built into this system, you'd have to come to the conclusions they aren't "controlled" by anyone. They are all done voluntarily by individual market actors without any centralized control at all.
I want to believe you're working to bring constructive discussion here, but this comment looks like trolling. Please, read all the sources I referenced in my post and then we can have a more informed discussion about what's really going on here.
I'll answer your questions using points below here:
"It's confusing"
"If you understood the conversion mechanisms built into this system, you'd have to come to the conclusions they aren't "controlled" by anyone. They are all done voluntarily by individual market actors without any centralized control at all."
"they aren't "controlled" by anyone"
"written mostly by an anarcho-capitalist (Dan Larimer)"
Thanks!
I said two separate currencies would be confusing. People are already confused with STEEM and Steem Dollars. How would STEEM, Steem Dollars, and Steem Dollars For Real This Time not be more confusing?
Of course they aren't using it now. Who would? They'd lose out big time because it currently only goes one direction. That's why it was removed from the steemit interface. The point being, anyone can use it. It's not some lever that only some people can pull. As long as enough people use it, the peg will be maintained (at least when it drops below $1).
Can you explain to me how that would happen? Do you really think witnesses would risk their position by doing something 500k people who voted them into that position wouldn't want? The whole point of this discussion is to figure out all perspectives for what's best for the network. There's a sound argument that we've lost quite a bit a money for everyone involved because we didn't fix this sooner and instead Tether went from $500k to $1.6B.
So Dan's opinion, considering he's no longer involved in STEEM, is more valid that the existing 20 witnesses and all the supporters and users we have here today? How is that decentralized? If the network sees the value in a pegged asset and wants one, then the Steem Dollar should be it, as designed. If we can do that after it naturally corrects back down to $1, why shouldn't we? That's what this discussion is all about.