The code part that we discussed in the past (and did not spend more time on it anymore) considered this code.
- https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1786
- https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1691
To my understanding, if curation rewards are disabled, that part is nulled and is not added to the author's rewards. In other words, they stay in the pool.
Perhaps @crokkon may help with that. I didn't want to interfere with the plans, just sharing our previous experience with the same attempt.
Now I am really confused. As I understand the code you referenced
<p dir="auto"><span>But according to <a href="/@tcpolymath">@tcpolymath it's not like that. <p dir="auto">I ran a new set of tests (the ones I did before making this post are less conclusive than I originally thought), but their results will be ready after the payout in 1 week.. <p dir="auto"><sub>Posted using <a href="https://www.steeve.app/@steeveapp" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" title="This link will take you away from hive.blog" class="external_link">Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interfaceshare_type author_tokens = reward_tokens.to_uint64() - curation_tokens;it says when curation_tokens are 0, author takes it all.
The line you refer to precedes the
<p dir="auto"><span><a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1789" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" title="This link will take you away from hive.blog" class="external_link">https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1789 this code splits the rewards into authors and curations. <p dir="auto"><span>But then <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1791" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" title="This link will take you away from hive.blog" class="external_link">https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1791 is there to split curations rewards amongst the curators. At this point, you have ca 75% (won't claim exact numbers) in authors rewards. However, pay_curators returns 0 (= curation_remainder) and max rewards (= curation_tokens) will be 0 too. <p dir="auto"><br /><span><a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1794" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" title="This link will take you away from hive.blog" class="external_link">https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1794<span> <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1797" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" title="This link will take you away from hive.blog" class="external_link">https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L1797 <p dir="auto">In both cases, zero is added and authors rewards stay at 75%. Then the beneficiaries are calculated, which may decrease authors rewards even more.pay_curatorsfunction.Where did you get the 75%?
On line 1788 you have full rewards in reward_tokens, right?
Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface
As I said I am not claiming that the numbers are right. However, the rewards are split in 3:1 ratio, therefore authors rewards make 75% of total rewards in the end.
Yes, it appears so that in rewards_tokens the full rewards are included.
Edit: https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/libraries/chain/database.cpp#L4897 Curation rewards ratio.
I think you're right :(
<p dir="auto"><code>get_curation_rewards_percent takes <code>comment as a parameter, but doesn't do anything with it and returns always 25%. <p dir="auto">And then in <code>pay_curators there is this piece of code: <pre><code>if( !c.allow_curation_rewards ) { unclaimed_rewards = 0; max_rewards = 0; } <p dir="auto">Which (imo without a reason) resets all curation rewards to 0. I opened an <a href="https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/3195" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" title="This link will take you away from hive.blog" class="external_link">issue to find out if it's a feature or a bug. <p dir="auto">Thanks a lot for pointing that out! We will have to update the way how steeve vote beneficiaries are implemented, but the general idea is still valid. <p dir="auto"><sub>Posted using <a href="https://www.steeve.app/@steeveapp" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" title="This link will take you away from hive.blog" class="external_link">Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interfacebump to follow this thread when the results come back from the newest test. hope you will provide your findings here @hr1, thanks.
I just did.
Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface
I have the results of the test. You were right, disabled curation rewards returns them into the reward pool.
I created 2 test comments and upvoted them right after. The first one had disabled curation rewards, the second one allowed. There is no difference between their author rewards (except the few satoshis due to the decreased voting power on second comment).
Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface