My Response To The Steem Witness & Justin Sun Meeting 3/4/20
Another exciting morning this morning. I woke up with tired eyes, walked out to the living room, and Stacie D blasts me with the latest development on the Steem witness vs. Justin Sun situation. So that is what I am jumping into today.
I started the morning by listening to the recording from their meeting last night. I have a few take aways, and then I talk a bit about some experiences that I am having on other social medias. I even got questioned about what would be considered "ethical".
If you know me at all, or are just meeting me, I believe that I am an individual. My decisions, my choices, and how I see what we call reality is my own. The only thing I can do is voice ideas from a different perspective.
So this interaction was pretty much what I expected. Justin Sun laid out a pretty clear vision of what he would like to achieve. He stated that he would like to take actions that he would consider to be an improvement for Steem, and then sell what tokens he would need to to get a return on his investment.
His timeline was a bit fuzzy though. He has a roadmap for the things he would like to get done, but when it comes to how quickly they can get done....well, he put that ball into the witnesses court. He clearly said "it is up to you".
On the other hand, the witnesses still had a list of demands. It did really seem very one sided. Everyone is still getting their butts burnt over the idea that Ned made a deal that isn't actually legally binding.
One thing that I caught in all of this was that Justin said that he did do is due diligence, even had a team of lawyers, and has the signed legal contracts to back up what he says. When he offered to create new contracts with the witnesses all I heard was crickets...and then someone said something along the lines of "that's not how it is done". What I took away from that is that they don't actually have anything legally obligating Justin to do anything, and when he offered to make it legal they just backed away. They are hiding behind the idea of anonymity to protect themselves, while still trying to hold Justin's feet to the fire.
I'm not sure about anyone else that may handle actual business in the physical world, but I don't know of any judge anywhere that would support taking someones property because of a handshake between others that didn't involve them.
The blockchain is like the Wild West. The Steem Witnesses continued to press Justin for commitments of what he would do with his stake, and like a real businessman he said that he will take note of everything that they said.
In all of this I stay right in the middle. I continue to create content, and post it to the Steem blockchain. I use Steemit.com and D.tube. I create 1 to 2 posts a day. I am even building a business on the Steem Blockchain....and I am just pushing forward.
The sad thing is all of the blood in the streets and name calling, and all of the destruction that this is doing to the people. People are drawing hard lines in the sand, and then throwing bricks at each other. People are unfriending, unfollowing, undelegating to projects, and even large curation projects are stopping out of protest..... All of this is caused by the people, and are hurting the people. The actions that I am seeing could be stopped by individuals, not by the "leaders".
In all of this I was even called a Troll. Because I ask the hard questions that go against the mob mentality. I am not Pro Steem Witness, but I am not Pro Justin Sun either. I am Pro Forward.
I even had a talk with people in discord that questioned what I saw as being ethical. I said that the concept of "right" or "wrong" is in the mind of the individual. The issue is when we surround ourselves with others that only think the same way we do. It creates an echo chamber that quickly gets out of control. That's when people start making decisions that they and the group feel are "right"...even when it hurts others.
I hope that anyone that is actually consuming my content will remember that we are all people. People have their own feelings, opinions, and experiences. We should not stoop to hateful name calling and utterly trying to destroy people over opposing views. If that is where we are as a people...then we deserve whatever is coming to us....
Be well
~The Yeti
Join me on Discord https://discord.gg/zyqFjJ3
https://steemit.com/@freedompoint
▶️ DTube
▶️ YouTube
🏆 Hi @freedompoint! You have received 0.05 STEEM reward for this post from the following subscribers: @tyrnannoght
Subscribe and increase the reward for @freedompoint :) | For investors.
You make assumptions that are clearly insuperable, such as that anything @justinsunsteemit says has any relation to what actually happened. You also make statements that are factually incorrect, such as that statements in writing from Stinc aren't extant, or matters of record.
Since the inception of the ninjamine, @dantheman, @ned, and Stinc have made representations as to the use of the stake they possessed, and these statements bind them to the restrictions they avowed.
Those statements were relied on by subsequent investors, and constitute contractual obligations on the part of @dantheman, @ned, and Stinc. Whether @ned told @justinsunsteemit is revealed in the purchase and sale documents executed at the time of sale - not by @justinsunsteemit's verbal allegations.
Do reconsider your account of the meeting, and I will bother to listen to the rest of your video when you do make one that is based on factual legal relevance.
Thanks!
Hi there! So I do not claim to give any legal advice. Feel free to watch my content if you want, or not.
I would say this. If Justin Sun has legal documents showing his ownership of a stake, regardless or how it was created or what handshakes are made on it...then he still has the signed contracts.
I suppose I would ask you how you think that a handshake between the ex owners and the steem witnesses would appear before a judge? Would a judge consider blogs and comments as something that is legally binding above a private transaction and legally binding transfer of property? Be well.
I am aware of case law in which representations to investors are obligations on corporations. Stinc has made many such representations over the years, some few of which I have provided examples of in other comments.
There is a reason prospectuses point out that their projections aren't guarantees of performance, and this is why.
Honestly man, I appreciate your zeal. I am in no way as passionate about all of this as you are. I am simply stating what I see. I am only pulling from personal experience, and looking at the available information.
I think there is alot of "information" that is flowing around, and it is for each of us to look through if we want to. As far as what will actually come of this...I know onething that will not. I do not argue or debate at all...especially online. I just like to have conversations and provoke thought. I in no way said anything about me having all of the answers. Again, I am just responding to what I saw and heard.... I am not even trying to convince anyone of one point of view or the other. Perhaps there is someone else that would enjoy your online debate and very large vocabulary haha. No hard feelings. Be well.
These are the 100% true facts of the situation...
honestly, lol
Steem wars part 1..The Empire has a hissy fit.
https://steemit.com/hive-100421/@lucylin/nxkuvibq
I really like your point of view 💪
Thank you. All just opinions. I suppose I ask questions that cant really be answered or others dont want to talk about. Im still looking arou d for everyones legal leg to stand on.