What it could rather do is dissipate the desire to invest in Hive, seeing a decrease in return, after investing in the platform. As I pointed out elsewhere, before the EIP, curation rewards were 50% lower

I feel that reducing curation rewards would discourage people from powering up. It could definitely impact this, as I mentioned in my post. It's really hard to say how much impact there would be, given

I think that's definitely one experiment that should be tried. I say that because I don't think that it is feasible to pay a curation reward that justifies the work done when curating. So it's always just

No, the proposed idea would have had no direct impact on author rewards, because author rewards are a fixed percentage of the marketcap of the coin (so the number of votes cast, for example, has no impact

I also think that anonymous downvotes would be helpful. But while it may be possible to do it, there's no obvious way to do so. I will give it some thought though, since I need to solve a related problem

The curation rewards for votes that are clustered together, which we see when auto-voting or curation trials are used could be penalized. For example, if 10 votes occur within 1 minute, the curation reward

We should empower peer to peer HP lending and allow new projects to bootstrap their ideas. I agree with both these ideas, in particular the latter. That's one of my two main focuses for Hive's future (the

I really vote for posts that I like - really not much worried about curation rewards - but I like whatever I get I think this is true of most manual curators. But in case, if that also goes to nuts, then

Looking at it from an author's point of view, lowering the curation reward will disincentivize powering up of stakes and hence, less reward for authors. That doesn't necessarily follow, since the amount

Without discussions of new ideas, we'll never get anywhere. I've heard a couple of new ideas that I haven't given much thought to just by reading replies in this post. But not from non-constructive comments

Regarding the effects of HBD on the inflation rate: although in theory it can go either way... Yes, I'm sure that's true. Unfortunately, it's a natural consequence of the coin going down more often than

That seems to be the general opinion :-) And I don't have a strong opinion on it, it was just a suggestion. But honestly speaking, I think it's fear more than actual analysis that drives the negative opinion

I should have probably rephrased my thoughts on solution 2. I think it can help a lot. But it also requires a fair amount of work, so it's not something that can be done quickly. And all my frontend devs

You're confusing two different forms of interest. The one you referring to is the interest paid to HBD. It is indeed set by the top 20 witnesses, and it is currently zero. There's a separate interest rate

I definitely think it is important to improve the information available to Hive apps devs, but even more importantly, I think we need to improve the actual APIs available to devs and create more software

Yep, but looks like we need a way to experiment in a way that people don't feel there is a risk to their current income stream. Probably we'll need to wait till we have HMTs to experiment with, as a new

Not exactly. The current situation is "you stake, you auto-vote (essentially doing no work)" and you get the highest return. I'm just looking for ideas on how to change that. I don't think it

That's the same view expressed by many manual curators in the comments, and I agree that it is a huge disadvantage for manual curators. I'll give it some thought.

i do get that there is strong will up top to move social part rewards from lvl 1 and cutting hive rewards to authors and curators and pushing it to HMT tokens (or wherever) and this looks like the first

Still in my opinion voting window is main issue here, Several people have expressed the opinion that this is the key issue affecting manual voters, and I have to agree. On the passive profits issue, most