Resource credits seem to only touch consensus for the claim account function.
The security offered by resource credits is minimal at best.
Fees are a safer and more economically viable solution to rate limiting and spam.
Yes, I consider this a vulnerability.
Just my 2 cents....
Isn't it possible too payout a fraction of the rewards of a post, just to cover the fees... that way one doesn't have to powerdown constantly to have some liquid Blurts...
Not really, because that assumes that the post is going to earn rewards.
It is also fairly complex.
I will think about it though, because we are definitely interested in exploring new ideas.
As I said... just my 2 cents 😁
But thanks for considering 👍
Keep throwing out ideas, never know when we're going to hit a gem.
That fees are okay. But spam wasn't the real problem, that has disturbed my personal Steem-experiences. It has been morely the farming and the circle-Jerks of big stakes. They sucked the pool down, spended no attend to the community nor the development and the poor rest was for the bloggers of quality content. I wonder, how to supress all these really annoying farming features.
https://blurt.world/blurt/@jacobgadikian/rfc-rewards
What we need at this stage are thoughts, opinions and good designs.
Yes I know that it's essential. Let me give you the hint, that our German fellow @jaki01 always had very good proposals about the reward curve, never heard by the big profiteurs, of course. You should contact him or search in his Steemit blog. He is a mathematician and has been active on the steem since 2016. He has repeatedly made committed suggestions to the Hardforks that have never interested any of the decision-makers.
In addition to your efforts, I will also look in his blog to see what he has written about the Reward Curve to present it to you. It has always been technically very sound and always in terms of acceptance by bloggers.
I've commented on one of his posts, and invited him to Blurt.
Hope he comes!
I noticed your comments to him on the Steem and of course he has been commenting here already. But also he saw Blurt's trending pages and he thinks, that you can't stop misuse without downvotes. If it's clear you will stop this, I think Blurt will be his preferred blockchain. As you know, on the Hive they have downvote and cleaning committees with strong stakes and he loves it to get rid of the farming gangs.
By the way, in an other reply I asked you how to stop this misuse, because I searched for arguments to convince @jaki01 to come here. He is positive with Blurt but without downvotes, the pest of misuse remains, he told me.
Here you go Jacob. I've put together all the articles I found from @jaki01 on the subject of improving the Steem. Yes, he wrote a few more, but we don't have the problem of flags on the Blurt anymore and the other articles were more motivation for Steemians than special suggestions for improving the blockchain.
I actually thought he had written a lot more on the reward curves, but surely this exchange of knowledge took place within comments with witnesses that are not easily to find. But I am sure you can get some ideas from the existing material to help make the Blurt a better blockchain than Steem ever has been.
https://steemit.com/@jaki01/hf-19-and-the-question-of-self-voting-hf19-und-die-frage-bezueglich-selbstvotes
https://steemit.com/@jaki01/very-first-impressions-after-hardfork-19-took-place
https://steemit.com/@jaki01/ideas-for-more-justice-on-steemit-ideen-fuer-mehr-gerechtigkeit-auf-steemit
https://steemit.com/@jaki01/conciliation-of-the-reward-curves-die-versoehnung-der-reward-kurven
https://steemit.com/@jaki01/proof-of-brain-proof-of-popularity
https://steemit.com/@jaki01/bad-effects-of-the-small-curation-window
https://steemit.com/hive-144703/@jaki01/edit-problems-since-communities-are-live
https://steemit.com/@jaki01/quo-vadis-steem
https://steemit.com/@jaki01/where-do-we-take-steem-from-here
Is reblogging not working on Blurt, because it is not for me, I have tried several times over the last week.
It's not
While the idea of fee for resource credit is good, but it is a problem for posting legitimate content even though I have about close to 2.9K Blurt Power.
So, is it like we have to power down and wait until we have liquid Blurt and then post again?
just have some liquidity in ur wallet. as far as i know, the fees are in ranges around 0.01 - 0.06 BLURT per tx, are we really discussing that it is hard to maintain liquidity equivalent of 0.06x0.02US$= 0.0012 US$ per posting? if the value of BLURT would go up significantly witnesses will adjust the fees downwards towards the equilibrium between price and demand. as opposed to steem and hive who dont use a fee system (rather rc based), in blurt the witnesses can set fee values themselves and are encouraged to adjust as fit. your BLURT does very much highlight the importance of the witnesses to keep an eye on the price of BLURT vv the height of the fee and also for voters to keep an eye on the fees thatt the witnesses set so that they stay economically sensible
No, no.. No complaint about maintaining the liquid Blurt.
My point was, since we are getting the post returns in only Blurt Power, and the power down takes about a week time to get it converted to liquid Blurt, there are chances of not getting a chance to post in that one week period if we don't have liquid tokens.
To be frank, we are still getting adjusted to the rules and to do's for this new system and yes, as we go forward, we will be in a good position with regards to having liquid tokens for fees and all other requirements.
Thanks for clarifying about fee and setting of it by Witnesses.
Good Day :)
welll blurted, prob misinterpreted! oh i actually believe that a 50/50 rewards payout has status open and assigned for HF 2, item #40, see https://blurtter.com/blurt/@jacobgadikian/hf2-status-update
OK, will have to wait for HF2 to be implemented then... Thanks for the update again :)
I claimed some accounts today and yeah they do cost the nominal fixed fee so I think that is deterrent enough.