Instead of higher APR from staking for longer period, what do you think about witness and SPS voting power multiplier?
For example we can stake for 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, and so on with upper limit.
STEEM staked for 1 week has x1 voting power multiplier for witnesses and SPS
STEEM staked for 2 weeks has x2 voting power multiplier for witnesses and SPS
STEEM staked for 3 weeks has x3 voting power multiplier for witnesses and SPS
up to the upper limit
This will be very simple to implement (at least compared to separate inflation pools or multitiered privileges you propose above and I proposed before on thecryptodrive's post, vastly simpler than Dan Larimer's proposal while solving the same problems) and comes with completely custom stake periods. Power down will need a rework like example below:
- An account has 100 STEEM staked for 2 weeks and 20 STEEM staked for 3 weeks, they start a power down.
- After 1 week passes since power down is initiated the account will have 100 STEEM staked for 1 week and 20 STEEM staked for 2 weeks.
- After 2 weeks passes since power down is initiated the account will have 100 liquid STEEM and 20 STEEM staked for 1 week.
- After 3 weeks passes since power down is initiated the account will have 120 liquid STEEM
All of my thoughts are very practical, so I'm not completely certain which way is the best to introduce the least overhead for Steem/the developers.
Whether we have separate inflation pools or one inflation pool with separate individual staking rewards (2 months = you get 5% of the pie, 6 months = you get 10% of the pie), as long as the end result is that stakeholders will have the ability to decide on how long they want to stake their Steem for, in return for benefits (increased APR, witnes & sps voting rights - maybe even with a multiplier, etc.).
This will result in a far more stable outcome, which can even be marketed in a really good way: Invest in Steem on your own terms, as if we'd go the quick and dirty road of changing the power-down absolutely.