RE: Just a Thought - Nothing "At" Stake
I reached that conclusion when I realized burning tokens do what RCs claim to do, but better and it's a lot simpler to explain and implement. Simplicity and elegance are better than complexity and confusion. Also, they threw waiting for equilibrium idea out the window when they simply edited RCs after HF20 to work better. Like why not do the same thing if the blockchain bloats again and prevents new users from using it again? It's a sloppy solution that feels more like a band-aid than a real solution.
Also, RCs work against new users in favor of pre-established larger users. New users have to buy in to participate in the system, while old users have their resource regenerated for them. Not exactly the most fair system ever. Sure, it gets users to hold onto the coins, but it doesn't make them more scarce and larger users can still spam as they please...
It still reaches equilibrium and adjusts to dynamics, and in the case where blockchain activity bloats, it prevents the whole 'bandwidth exceeded' debacle preventing all actions, instead of preventing the more expensive ones. I think the solution is quite elegant, for what its purpose was.
Agreed on newer users problem. That's still a problem but I think still usable. Though I haven't started from being a new user since the flip so I can't really comment on that. We should go find such a new user ;).
It would only be buy in at this point in time but not necessarily in the future as if there are RC delegation pools, an app can issue them at the door so that users can interact and then lose them at log out. afaik
Yeah delegation pools are a pretty big deal and HF20 makes a lot less sense without them. The big worry is that the demand for RCs will be high and people will start selling them. This won't be a problem until we hit another out of control bull run so I'm not too worried.
At the same time dapps aren't going to want to charge for RCs because they'll want more users on their app instead. If will be interesting to see where all this supply/demand takes the platform.
I think that the selling of RCs is going to be a good thing as it could be another way to distribute SMTs by rewarding investors. Plus, the price will go up the higher the demand which will drive more powering up and take steem (currently 58 million) off exchanges pushing Steem price up. People will want to cash Steem which takes RCs off the market and that price goes up. Do I power up and sell RCs or sell high priced steem once? Sellers will have a harder choice to make, especially as the selling of RCs doesn't affect vote power.
I think it's ironic that @greer184 talked trash about HF20 and RCs while at the same time proposing there is nothing at stake...
Am I taking crazy pills here? A user pays a little money for RCs and uses those RCs to post to the blockchain. Isn't that exactly what's being proposed in the Original Post?
RE: No, because RCs regenerate.
RE: Steem regenerates with inflation. It's just "slower". Which is also not true if there is a high enough demand for RCs.
Things that RCs still need to answer:
How burning stake addresses these issues:
I think a lot of this has to do with the regeneration of RCs. If RCs didn't automagically regenerate and were staked and only given back after meeting specific requirements, then it might work as intended, but in the meanwhile, the only people RCs look to help are large stakeholders granted Steem has a future.
With RC delegation pools, you would either have to buy the RCs or have them gifted to you. The issue with that is that larger users can move around RCs via delegation to side accounts and then you can farm with that set of accounts. Because RCs regenerate, these farms can easily be maintained and grown. At that point you're only harming the single account small user folks.
Regenerate resources can improve problems, but non-regenerative resources don't suffer from these issues, because there is no getting them back. I'm not a fan of regenerative resources because they hint that a problem exists but don't commit to actually solving that problem.
RCs have no voting power/ draw on the pool, just bandwidth I think - and are only available on powered up Steem. It is in the best interest of the application to have users use their app so the app (if it didn't have SP or needed more RCs) would be the customer of the delegation pool, not the users themselves.
RCs provide access to the pool. That's how they currently reduce spam. I'm saying that it's not to hard to get around that restriction granted you already had the RCs to work with.
Also, the application would then have to distribute the RCs again for the users of the app to do anything. So RCs end up with the user unless you have non-Steem associated accounts through the application which is more complicated and I imagine less desirable for the users.
by access to the pool do you mean ability to post? Yes.
So a larger account could delegate RCs to spammers or, they could sell them in a delegation pool to applications. When there is a viable revenue stream, why would they give them to spammers unless the spammers would pay, which in that case, they would just buy the Steem for their own RCs.
The application can provide from a pool on sign-in and give something like 30 SP worth of RCs so that account could interact. when they leave out the door, they lose their RCs. This means that a pool with RC's ascribed to application A, can't have those RC's used in application B. I think.