RE: The History of Delegated Proof-of-Stake (DPOS)
Let’s start ...
If you think @blocktrades is the first to talk about consensus mechanisms on this platform after reading a 2020 post, you are sadly mistaken.
I like to keep things precise, if you are going to dump on me everything said and done by every new and past witness on steem this is not going to work. Every witness shares an "equal" responsibility to do the same thing (I don't fucking care about a game review or what you think about life). My replay is tied to the witness above and the definition of transaction refusal. I don't remember discussing which food they like to eat. Got that?
Now that being a witness and farming the reward pool is not enough, let take a few seeps from that tasty SPS.
The DPOS systems has been posted, blogged and commented about in countless instances on the Steem platform (and other message boards & fora for that matter). It's been subject to a LOT of debate.
Not sure why you are also dumping this on me, I didn't say the contrary or discuss such a point. There are unlimited resources about blockchain development and medicine online, that fact doesn't make you a B developer and neurosurgeon instantly. Yea, because not everyone has the time nor the will to dig, that's why people delegate their trust to other people, so they can do the right thing and explain the void to them FOR A PRICE.
Nearly all of the original top 20 witnesses have been pretty vocal about their views in general, which is only normal since before participants in this network should vote for anyone as a witness, it's nice to know their views.
This is too vague, Their opinions about what exactly? Why are you dumping random shit on me? Precision is king. Yes, you are probably talking about all those movie and game reviews, gotchya. Are you talking about the whole picture or just the last drama? Like almost no one of them was posting monthly updates for being entrenched at the top chilling for years. Wait, I mean real updates, not some existential BS, or something like "Hey" every 6 months when they drop off the top 20.
If being vocal means to you whine and accepting the status quo for 4 years then it's, of course, your opinion. My definition of duty clearly differs from yours. It's funny to see witnesses kissing people ass for support, then when someone asks about accountability they act like if it's a POW chain.
I would personally say it's necessary to know their views before voting, but it seems that currently there are witnesses in the top20 that have NEVER posted anything...
Not necessary! Yea, I voted on X just because he is funny and looks good and trusty, and also voted on me once.
No, dear friend, this is idiocracy.
Imagine having 2 countries, where the first one is represented by highly-skilled technocrats and educated population, and the second wone by a bunch of random joe (probably movie critics writers) and the population has no way to check and make them accountable for their actions. Here what's going to happen:
The first country will thrive and become a superpower, the second will be conquered by the first country and will be transformed into a back garden, or a theatre since there are enough people there who think that emotions can melt iron.
YET YOU ARE VOTING FOR SOME OF THESE.
No shit Einstein? WTF with all the dump? since you are a historian, maybe you should go back and read one of my posts to understand the WHY.
To conclude, it's sad that some people are still playing the role of cheerleaders instead of vigils. If you are going to keep the same mindset and approach as the last 4 years, you can be sure that the next 4 will be the same and nothing will improve.
You replied to someone by making vague accusations that they are keeping people in the dark and implying that they have a responsibility to educate others, and then you tried to claim that the concept of transaction refusal has never been discussed before, and when someone referred quite correctly to transaction refusal as consensus mechanism(s) you lost your shit, accusing them of not being precise. The ridiculous part is that so far you still consider yourself correct AND precise, but you're neither, dragging the conversation from the completely valid cringe worthy reaction to vacuous idiotic nonsense of "keeping people in slavery".
He never said that the presence of resources somewhere makes one an expert in that field, instantly, or otherwise. He contended you ridiculous idiotic nonsense that people are kept in the dark regarding how the blockchain functions. He didn't say anything about what it takes to be a developer, so while you're dumping this on him as you act as if what he said had absolutely nothing of relevance to what you said please explain exactly how are people kept in the dark if the information is freely accessible to anyone? O yeah. You didn't "discuss" such a point. Dumbfuck.
There's no point to expose anything more especially seeing that it's simply a matter of vehemently disregarding, twisting and bullshiting about what was said and why.
Keep holding their toes to the flame, or whatever you think you're doing.
It's amazing to see how much patience and goodwill can be found in the Steem community, giving attention and time to people that would not particularly deserve it.
Here's an upvote :) #SteemOn