meeting points:
- Dev sync
- Recurrent transfers current status + RC considerations
- voting changes thoughts (allow 1000% votes/downvotes)
- replace condenser for ecency ?
- Create a new virtual operation recovery_account_update
next meeting is on january 4th at 17 CET, it will be streamed by @crimsonclad, be sure to tune in :)
And if you have points you'd like to see addressed in the next one, feel free to post them in the comments.
Thank you for the post.
I do not think it is time to start working on changes to the reward voting system yet. I am still of the opinion we need to let the current reward voting system run for at least a year, and that the priority should still be the fixing of the witness selection retention system.
That I feel should be the number one priority. We still have not fixed or changed the system that lead to the creation of Hive from Steem. I know people keep saying it can't happen again, it can't happen again, over and over. It was something they used to say on Steem also before the takeover.
I feel our priority should be protecting the user base. That includes the casual viewers, the content creators, the investors and the people that like to play the games. The only protection the users have from a system wide one sided change is the ability to have in place witnesses they trust, that they can vote in, and not a system where 3 or 4 people can control who is in the top 21 witnesses.
Just still my thoughts and only representing myself.
I am not sure of all the nuances here. But I agree. Protecting the platform should probably be a high priority. It seems like so many people are "shell shocked" from March Madness. So it makes sense to try to prevent that from ever happening again.
protecting the platform has been done with delayed voting in the last hard fork :)
The current system has actually been running for more than a year (hf22 was the 29th august 2019) so I think it's high time that we tweak things
Yet it still allowed a semi hostile takeover. The 30 days will still allow a hostile take over type thing. A large account buys in slowly, lets the account build and then after the 30 days starts to put in people they want. All it does is make someone wait 30 days before trying. Justin Sun fiasco ran for more than 30 days.
With out a real and meaningful change to the witness system there is no protection. Just my view
IMO, 1000% would be an overkill. A max of 200-250% can be a good enhancement. Thanks to you and the entire team for the unbreakable commitment to HIVE.
yeah what came out of the meeting was that if we ever implement something like this the max would be around 300%
allow 1000% votes/downvotes ? What's this?
@mintrawa: Witness FR - Gen X - Geek 🤓 Gamer 🎮 traveler ⛩️
Don't miss the Hive Power UP Day! more info here
Meaning you could spend the equivalent of 10 votes into one single vote.
Oh Ok I understand now, as a one shot vote of our entire daily voting power. Thanks for the explanation 😉
@mintrawa: Witness FR - Gen X - Geek 🤓 Gamer 🎮 traveler ⛩️
Don't miss the Hive Power UP Day! more info here
Ill go for 500% :)
Thanks for sharing this @howo!
The vote penalty for the poor?
That bs killed comments.
Thanks for your work!
Thanks for sharing
Congratulations @howo! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Do not miss the last post from @hivebuzz:
One point to possibly address (thanks for asking!): There have been a lot of complaints about issues with Hive nodes. This has been going on ever since the last hardfork. What would be a good way for such issues to be reported to the core dev team by the various frontends? And to help fix them?