RE: Steem Blockchain Suggestion: Increased Liquidity - For a Price
You know it turns out the liquidity issues with steem are a myth. Let me explain why.
If I purchase ethereum I can sell it seconds later if I want. This is true of all cryptos.
It is also true of STEEM.
If I purchase steem, I can sell that steem seconds later.
Where it differs is that I can choose to POWER it up and convert it to steem power. This is more akin to purchasing a CD or making a long term investment.
If a person is truly primarily concerned with liquidity and just steem as an investment then it is pretty simple. Don't power it up.
This is something that I hadn't really thought through myself until you wrote this post. I'd always seen the liquidity problem as a barrier.
Yet in reality that barrier does NOT exist unless you choose to power up.
Powering up is not a feature available to other cryptos, so if you treat steem the same as you would any other crypto then it is just as liquid.
earned SP is not powered up by choice, some users may want to power down faster and burn some to get the steem
This is true. Yet that is also a special feature to steem. There is no true analog to that in other cryptos. The closest it could be compared to is mining. It could be spun many different ways in terms of the outcome of our mining. It can be spun positive, or it can be spun negative. In the negative sense as has been the typical approach it can be "I posted and was paid in steem, steem power, and steem backed dollar, and I cannot get to the steem power very fast so it has low liquidity". It can also be spun in a positive way "Not only does posting pay me in steem backed dollars, and steem, but it also gives me an investement into the platform."
It is mainly a matter of perspective and how it is phrased, and looked at. If you approach it from the negative then yes you are given steem power as a portion of the income from what is effectively the method of mining for steem, and this portion has low liquidity. If you view it from the positive then you are getting steem, and sbd which have high liquidity AND you are also getting investment into the platform.
This could also be spun other ways. What if the mining were effectively halved and all you got was the steem, and the sbd, and the payouts were effectively halved because you didn't get the steem power side of things.
At that point the old steem power rewards that were no longer there would likely be attractive and missed.
The issue is steem/it/busy.org is being compared to other cryptos and there is not really a one to one comparison. It has several unique qualities that are like trying to fit a square into a circle hole (yes if the hole is large enough you can still do that, but you know what I mean).
So mainly my AH HA moment about liquidity was also about perception. It can be spun as having no liquidity, yet if you spin just the parts that actually can be compared to other cryptos then it has as much liquidity as they do. It adds MORE and this more has no analog within the other cryptos to compare it to.
So I guess what I am getting at with this realization is we can perhaps spin this into a positive thing when talking to potential newcomers by how we frame this perspective. If they are simply a crypto investor... they can buy steem and never power up and it is the same as buying/selling other cryptos.
I do see the appeal of being able to get to the steem power quickly in the form of a protest, or I need cash quickly for some family emergency and I know there is some in steem power that I can get to slowly. However, I also know this is how steem power works.
If we want to change this as a form of experiment to see how it works I am okay with that. With the caveat that if it doesn't work out too well we can take a step back from the idea. This is true of pretty much any idea for me at the moment. Let's experiment. I'd like to see a lot of experimenting, but one experiment per more frequent hard fork. When there are a lot of changes it is difficult to say with certainty which change led to which effect.
I agree that the liquidity is there as a choice, but having more options is beneficial too. Users may want to power up to have more voting power, earn curation rewards, and earn the interest on their SP. Having users make this choice is beneficial to the network, because it reduces the liquid supply of STEEM. If we added the 'enhanced liquidity' options, there would be additional benefit to the network for having users power up.
Yes, I don't disagree. It was more a perception and AH HA moment. I was seeing the liquidity as a barrier as I'd heard people like John McAfee say there was no liquidity. Yet really it has the same liquidity as ANY other crypto unless you decide to power up. That is optional, and people stating it has no liquidity makes it clear that people haven't really considered the distinction that powering up is totally voluntary and optional.
As long as they don't power up then it is just as liquid as any other crypto.
As to your idea about powering down. Like I've said many times... at this point I'm all for experiments. As long as they are controlled. We also have to be willing to say "that didn't work" if it fails and take a step back.