Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

0.17.0rc1: latter beneficiaries will get less pay #909

Closed
abitmore opened this issue Mar 7, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

0.17.0rc1: latter beneficiaries will get less pay #909

abitmore opened this issue Mar 7, 2017 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@abitmore
Copy link
Contributor

abitmore commented Mar 7, 2017

According to this code in cashout_comment_helper(...) of datase.cpp

            for( auto& b : comment.beneficiaries )
            {
               auto benefactor_tokens = ( author_tokens * b.weight ) / STEEMIT_100_PERCENT;
               auto vest_created = create_vesting( get_account( b.account ), benefactor_tokens, has_hardfork( STEEMIT_HARDFORK_0_17__659 ) );
               push_virtual_operation( comment_benefactor_reward_operation( b.account, comment.author, to_string( comment.permlink ), vest_created ) );
               author_tokens -= benefactor_tokens;
               total_beneficiary += benefactor_tokens;
            }

After paid out each beneficiaries, benefactor_tokens will be deducted from author_tokens, so next beneficiary will be paid less even if with same weight.

@mvandeberg
Copy link
Contributor

Merged

afalaleev added a commit to GolosChain/golos that referenced this issue Feb 28, 2018
As a comment option, authors should be able to specify a number of
beneficiaries to receive a percentage of the rewards and the percent of
the potential liquid rewards to receive as Steem Power. Unallocated
rewards by default go to the author as they currently do.

Inspired by steemit#773 and supported by the community.

Commit contains fix miscalculation when paying beneficiaries steemit#909 .

As described in steemit#2162, 8 beneficiniries is small,
that is why limit is 64.
afalaleev added a commit to GolosChain/golos that referenced this issue Feb 28, 2018
As a comment option, authors should be able to specify a number of
beneficiaries to receive a percentage of the rewards and the percent of
the potential liquid rewards to receive as Steem Power. Unallocated
rewards by default go to the author as they currently do.

Inspired by steemit#773 and supported by the community.

Commit contains fix miscalculation when paying beneficiaries steemit#909 .

As described in steemit#2162, 8 beneficiniries is small,
that is why limit is 64.
afalaleev added a commit to GolosChain/golos that referenced this issue Mar 1, 2018
As a comment option, authors should be able to specify a number of
beneficiaries to receive a percentage of the rewards and the percent of
the potential liquid rewards to receive as Steem Power. Unallocated
rewards by default go to the author as they currently do.

Inspired by steemit#773 and supported by the community.

Commit contains fix miscalculation when paying beneficiaries steemit#909 .

As described in steemit#2162, 8 beneficiniries is small,
that is why limit is 64.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants