>This was done to prevent users from using it unknowingly when SBD is above $1 USD and losing money.
I understand their rationale for removing it, but the reasoning is very poor. What you do when people are using something without the proper information/education on how to use it is to inform/educate them. And as I said - this is a critical function for the entire SBD-pegging protocol. You don't just remove it from the main interface because some users are too stupid to learn how things work before transferring or "converting" tokens. There's absolutely no reason why a simple sentence or two - maybe even in a pop-up before confirming the transaction - can't be included on the wallet page. I mean, they tell us that someone's SP is delegated, so why can't they add something that says, *"Hey, dummy! Don't convert these tokens at a loss if you don't want to take a loss!"*
>In fact 20,000 SBD was converted at ~$7 USD SBD price, for a great loss and the main reason this was changed.
Right...so because someone who was really ignorant about the conversion function screwed up horribly, we all have to be treated like idiots? And the best part is...these people are running a large project with huge delegation from Ned/STINC and are also running a witness node. But they had no idea how conversions work?
Maybe they should not be receiving so much undeserved grants of money and power?
>The core idea behind this change is no legitimate user should be throttled under "normal" and "reasonable" use.
Sure, that may be practical on a "normal" social media platform. But Steem isn't a normal platform. We have limited resources, and even though we have a rather large capacity blockchain, we also have to consider bloat and how quickly it can scale upwards with each new active user. If it's not "reasonable" for a user to leave comments every 20 seconds (or *every three seconds!*), then we should implement this type of practicality in order to help protect the finite resources from potential exploits.
I see no reason at all why we constantly need to cater to the desires of spammers. And if we're going to reduce comments to three seconds under the stated rationale, then why not reduce the parent posting time to three seconds as well? I'm sure there are people out there who can spit out a good post every three seconds. I'd hate to throttle their fun. :)
>I honestly would like to see longer payout window.
I think most of us would. But the reasons for reducing the payout window are some of the same reasons for limiting open orders to 28 days. However, I'm not sure that evergreen content is something that can be reasonably handled by a blockchain that works at the speeds we're working with here.
I have advocated a "tipping purse" for Steem/Steemit for a long time and think that at least having that option on every post may help with the evergreen problem. I have also tried to make a case for advertising here, but the community is still pretty split on that. Too many people seem to think that magic digital tokens alone can sustain a shitposting career forever. Most normal people - and particularly, investors of social media companies - understand that the real value of a social network is monetizing the large active user base through advertising by businesses trying to find an audience to purchase their goods and services. We don't have that here and STINC and the other interface developers seem to be not very interested in the concept.
>I'd add though most content on Steem wouldn't deserve a long payout window so there is that.
I would add that most content here doesn't deserve *ANY* payout window. But that's just my subjective opinion.
>I would have liked to see more big improvements for 1.5+ years of work...
Yeah, I'm still waiting to see any of the stuff from the 2017 STINC road map be completed. We're not that far from 2019 and, so far, we've only seen a color and logo change.
>It becomes you like this and this but not that but you got to take 20 changes along with it.
The thing is...we don't *have* to accept it. It's up to the witnesses. The problem is...they almost always accept the entire package so as not to upset the overlords and risk losing witness votes. Or, they simply don't understand the proposals or just don't care enough to have an opinion either way.
Anyway...thanks for the comment. I appreciate that you put some time and effort into it.