What if powerful accounts believe @meno is a bad person, and thus needs to be forked off? What if powerful accounts believe the @helpie initiative needs to go away? The precedent we would be leaving behind, would make it "reasonable" to make such calls and for the life of me, I can't accept it.
Ethereum has already set the precedent. If the community comes to consensus to change the immutability of the blockchain this is allowed (and even heavily supported by definition).
Ethereum Classic is often viewed as a scammers paradise, and they are the ones who vouched for immutability.
With all due respect, you can't compare 15K stake to 50M. When it really comes down to it, one has to ask themselves if the backlash of changing immutability is worth it. In my opinion, for this situation, no, it's not worth it, but I'm certainly not going to fault someone for believing that it is.
Consensus > All
No offense taken, I guess I'm using myself as an example because I rather not involve others in my opinion. But it's not hard to imagine a "bad whale" being forked out, and who would be the judge of that?
Posted using Partiko Android
Yes, that would be much worse... like if everyone got together and forked @haejin's stake to @null or something. That would be pretty terrible.
However, again, I would make the argument that the backlash from that action would be much worse than the backlash from nullifying Steemit, and again, 1M is a lot less than 50M, so the backlash would be far worse than the benefits.
Also, DPOS needs to be a lot more careful than a chain like Ethereum. DPOS is a republic. If our elected officials start running around doing whatever they want because they own the majority of the platform it's all over. We'd be left with a broken system no better than central banking. A 51% attack can happen anywhere.