Steem was launched as an experiment combining blockchain and social web space. Similar developments can be characterized by the sentence: a blockchain for the application.
Actually as an application Steemit did nothing new,moreover, it has quite a few controversial decisions. In the architecture itself and the variables in the economy. Why do parent_permlink? For comments. And for posts? For category? Why then it wasn’t carried out with the ability to ask? We decided to push the first tag automatically there. Most of these questions are unanswered. Designing a web application is also a difficult task. But this experiment passed quickly and evolved into a public project that can’t be restarted with a more correct architecture or data structure.
Why the reward pool in Vests but the API request gives an estimate reward to SBD although it isn’t clear yet that there is enough supply to issue a promissory note. And 50% obviously go to Vests, others are already emitted to SBD. Why not immediately write to Vests if it’s the source in the pool of awards?
The more any developer studies the source code of Steem, the more questions arise in the rationality of individual approaches. In the meantime, Steem has grown on the blockchain enthusiasts. A large application with a data structure that doesn’t stand up to reasonable criticism. But the system is viable. Successful. And overgrown with greater opportunities.
Forks appeared, the Russian-speaking community splits into the Golos. The mechanisms inside have become increasingly detailed and divergent with the original purpose. The Steemit application began to abstract from Steem own blockchain system. The structure allowed to launch new applications on the basis of the architecture laid in the very beginning.
Steem is a very interesting experiment succeeding in 100%. Only its basic goals set the trend which is already impossible to cope with. The base of users is undoubtedly positive but the internal inflationary economy and the initial distribution of tokens becomes a burden of newcomers to the sandbox of the Steem ecosystem.
Perhaps the project understands that it becomes unattractive for new developments.
Who wants to buy tokens with fading inflation where the initial distribution still has a dominant state throughout the system. The extinguishing of inflation indicated in percentages is a sign of injustice. Those who enter the system later will receive excellent conditions in comparison with those who came earlier. The system itself is already mathematically opposed to them. And what about the problem of initial distribution? It’s inherent not only to the old ICO but also new. For example, let’s look at the distribution of Sapien tokens:
In addition to the money received on ICO the team receives 20% of all blockchain project tokens. Is this fair? The money received on ICO is a kind of obligation to spend it with great benefit to the network (yes, there are many legal opportunities to get around this).
The fact remains that the team should be able to get tokens either in an agreed assessment for their work or by buying tokens on the market. Any distribution of tokens where the founders or the team receive a percentage of the entire network without agreement between the participants of their contribution to the system at the time of snapshot creation is a trick to seize power in DPOS blockchain systems. It doesn’t matter how it’s presented in documents in the form of a user agreement - this distribution puts at a disadvantage any other developers who will be interested in connecting to the blockchain system. Snapshot for the launch of the network must be agreed and accepted by the community at the very beginning. Moreover, the token must be reassessed from month to month in accomplished work on the blockchain system.
These two problems create the need to make the fork of the Steem blockchain system and try to minimize their impact on the decentralized DPOS system. As a result they give us the final points for justification of the fork:
- Positioning of the blockchain system as a sandbox for various applications;
- Absence of a mathematical advantage for early participants (constant not gradually fading inflation);
- Consensus on the initial assessment of the contribution to the development of the system or donations to the fund for taking an ectype (snapshot) which can be included in the genesis block.
Having studied mistakes of the current solutions and followed the vector of their development, the CryptoStorm fund decided to modify the software in the form of Steem fork. The goal is to set a vector for the technological development of the social blockchain system in the form of a sandbox for independent teams and individual developers. The development of the protocol, data structures in it - is a very important point in creating a comfortable ecosystem for new applications that won’t have to look back, they will be aimed at the future. Together with us.
This is the vision of the principles of building a future world.
Fund manager - Anatoly @on1x Piskunov
Redline of the document №1 - Mar 26, 2018