we will reduce the rewards given to sharers bringing traffic to our ecosystem by about 99%. I'm not sure that's enough. You should probably start downvoting anyone who brings traffic to our ecosystem because

I'm not going out of my way to look for things so chances are I may very well not happen to see them again. I don't recall seeing or downvoting them before, but maybe I did. Detlev being an example. I

I will sometimes make small downvotes when I think the post has attracted too many large votes, autovotes, and paid curation for the type of content. Hive can be looked at as a business and we have to

I will sometimes make small downvotes when I think the post has attracted too many large votes, autovotes, and paid curation for the type of content. Hive can be looked at as a business and we have to

Holding HBD in savings definitely increases the value of HBD and indirectly of HIVE (since HBD is created from destroyed HIVE). In the present environment where 'stabilizing' usually means increasing it

I'm here

There is a server running the bot code that needs constant access to the account to perform the trades and transfers so one way or another the keys have to be online.

Probably, but trade offs: Discourages other participants, which is what we really want to develop a robust market Might reduce the profit generated by the stabilizer, though it's not at all clear what

Correct. All of the budget sent to the stabilizer is used for trading per its charter and then sent back, potentially with a profit.

Just too much demand imbalance in the market. The stabilizer pushes the price down, but with a finite budget, if there continues to be people willing to overpay, it takes time for the pushes to be effective.

What you're seeing is the effect of an immature and small market. The stabilizer along with the natural incentives of the blockchain ensure that HBD will return to peg "soon" after these sorts

If HBD exceeds the target value, the stabilizer sells HBD to try to reduce the value, which also generates a profit for the stabilizer and the profit is returned to the DHF. If the value is more than $1.05,

I'm here

Yes, it is clear that the HBD stabilizer makes more profit when HBD fluctuates a lot. @dalz has produced a number of reports and charts showing big profit gains during previous volatility episodes.

I agree with all of this.

I just looked through the proposals and there are several passing proposals with no blocktrades vote. I didn't count but it seemed like close to half.

Blocktrades doesn't have enough voting power to pass anything unless there are about 10 million additional concurring votes. That's not an insignificant number in my view, but if you think it's too low,

The funding for the hbdstabilizer proposals gets sent back to DHF, often with a profit, so it's self-funding as you say.

I didn't realize it was expiring so soon, but the interim proposal seems fine. It doesn't matter who makes the proposal as long as the funding goes directly to hbdstabilizer. I'll make a new proposal to

There is a confusing typo in the first line.