My Personal Thoughts - Steem/Tron Saga

in #steem5 months ago (edited)

This is a very long and rambling video where I discuss my personal experience of the days leading up to the Steem Community Witness initiated Soft Fork 22.2 and The Tron Hostile Takeover a few days later.


I walk through my thoughts on the situation, while also covering where the Ninja Mine even came from (and why it's different), the clear threats to the Steem Blockchain, how certain aspects described in this hostile marketing from Tron were actual items listed in the sale and therefore payment was dependent on them occurring (and therefore a very valid threat), do I think this was all avoidable, and what happened in those "Witness Chats".


This is an hour-long, yes a whole hour, rambling video of my opinions and only that. I speak for no one and represent no one but myself.


As promised I do try to answer a few community questions after my rambling, around 40-minute timestamp (if you want to fast forward).. but most were answered through my explanation of the situation though.. in my own words.


The video was one take, unrehearsed, no plan.. just me talking my way through my experiences in this situation leading up to where we are now. What I think, and what I experienced.

... and apparently, I had a lot to say. Due to the size of the file, I had some issues uploading and therefore it's a day late. Since the time of recording, we have already seen a few more updates (and got more questions sent to me).. So I will try to record another (shorter one) soon. To update everyone on where we are now and what the next possible steps may be.



The following are just my honest thoughts and opinions. They do not represent any group or attempt to speak on anyone's behalf. This is just me... saying what I think.



**2 of the 3 Exchanges involved in the Hostile Takeover I mention in the video have started powering down as of yesterday.

**I will go over the most recent updates in the next video.

**As mentioned in the video, this is a good post that shows some of the concerning messaging coming from Tron, leading up to the Soft Fork https://steempeak.com/steem/@pfunk/the-case-for-the-temporary-soft-fork


Much Love,

Justine

Sort:  

It's a good idea to relate your personal experience of these events, for improving public understanding, and for the sake of posterity. I agree that the founder's stake has been a sword of Damocles hanging over our heads as long as Steem has existed, and that witnesses have failed to resolve that threat heretofore.

I have personally engaged several current and former consensus witnesses in an attempt to better decentralize Steem, and still do presently. One issue that is pressing is how large stakeholders are advantaged by the extant witness voting mechanism over lesser stakeholders. 30 witness votes without depletion magnifies the influence of larger stakes over witnesses, and this appears - whether it does or not - to compromise witnesses regarding their positions due to their dependence on such stakeholders.

I will not detail supporting evidence of that pandering resulting from the problem (despite much existing), but will show the math that explains how larger stakes are enabled to wield influence, disproportionately to their actual hodlings, over governance.

User A has 1m Steem, casts 30 votes for witness, and wields 30M Steem influence over governance. User B has 100 Steem, casts 30 votes for witness, and wields 3000 Steem influence over governance. The difference between their hodlings is 999,900 Steem. The difference in the weight of their influence on governance however is 29,997,000 Steem. Heretofore witnesses have failed to rectify this imbalance in influence on governance, and an accusation can reasonably be made that, due to the general misunderstanding of this magnification of stake weight, historically consensus witnesses have been willing to pander to the interests of the most substantial stakeholders to secure their positions.

I have discussed this current dilemma with many stakeholders, current, and former witnesses held in high regard generally, and have been given estimates of the stake held by Tron presently of ~100M Steem. Under the current witness voting paradigm that theoretically enables Tron to wield 3B Steem influence over governance, and this dramatically contributes to Sun's ability to instantly undertake control of the blockchain at his sole option.

Clearly, this is a problem, and like the founder's stake itself, has been a problem with decentralizing governance as long as Steem has existed. This voting mechanism was coded by Stinc, which held the largest stake on the platform, and has refused to abstain from voting through codified mechanisms, although before Tron did so this stake has never before been used to effect governance directly. It is obvious why Stinc did so.

While making the change to 1 Steem = 1 vote may not completely prevent this stake from being capable of arbitrary centralization of blockchain governance, the principles of decentralization, and of proportionality of influence of stake critical to DPoS, strongly support doing so. All that is required to make the change is to deplete VP for witness votes 100% without recharge (until votes are withdrawn, whereupon VP recharges 100% instantly), and merely adding VP code already deployed and well proven for ordinary voting with appropriate parameters is all that is necessary to do so.

In discussion with a consensus witness since this hostile takeover has been undertaken, I have been struck by their unwillingness to substantively address this disproportionate influence of substantial stakeholders over governance. Frankly, their approach to the matter raised a stench of undue influence that triggered the smell test, and forced failure. TBQH, they sounded exactly like Roy Liu, making statements that meant nothing. I have also discussed this with other community consensus witnesses and former consensus witnesses with less objectionable results, including agreement that this change reduces Steem's vulnerability to Sybil attack, such as it now suffers via the founder's stake deployed by Tron.

In the event we resecure Steem governance from the present attacker, it is of critical importance that we decrease our susceptibility to Sybil attack from this vector, and normalizing the influence of stake on governance so that all Steem holdings equally weigh on witnesses is essential.

This problem has strengthened Tron's hand in it's attack on our blockchain, 30x. It's time to acknowledge the weaknesses of Steem that have allowed this existential threat to manifest, and arrange to resolve them to make the blockchain more secure and more decentralized.

Thanks!

I believe you have gotten this reaction because much of what you suggest actually changes the base design of DPOS. If stake weighed voting is not what you want (and I have my own issues with it at times), then dpos perhaps is not for you. And I don’t mean that negatively.. it’s just some of these things are basis of the whole design itself.

As far as witness vote expiration, how to avoid issues with exchanges voting in the future etc.. I feel all these things have been openly debated and may be experimented with in the future.

This situation isn’t just about a large stake holder though, as you imply.. it’s about a fund that was established in ways that gave them an advantage and all of this was “accepted” based on the idea that it was done in place of an ico as a way to find development for the Steem blockchain. Therefore it’s very different imo

You can have stake weighted voting of witnesses that use mana, just like votes on content do. Things just like that (and others) have been mentioned on here for a couple years now but none of the top witnesses thought it necessary to do anything about it, mostly because they were all being kept in power by a handful of accounts. Changing that would have affected their paycheck.

Mana has to do with regeneration of vote amount.. RCs etc.. how does that have anything to do with witness voting or how would that even be beneficial? Or are you saying you don’t feel there should be 30 equal weight witness votes?

Yes, I am saying that every vote for a witness you cast it uses your witness voting power. How many votes you wanna cast depends on how much weight you want to give to each vote. 1 full power vote or any number of smaller votes. It's essentially one vote per stake, but the weighting of that vote can vary.

Please reread my exegesis of how witness voting currently works, and what I propose is necessary. In no way do I suggest anything other then DPoS. What I note happens now is that larger stake's influence is multiplied 30x.

That's not DPoS at all, but stealth oligarchy. Stake should be proportionately represented in influence on governance in order to effect DPoS, and that is what I propose.

The abstention of exchanges and the founder's stake from voting is a separate issue, and I also recommend both of those parties execute code already available to restrict their accounts from voting.

I do specifically address the founder's stake advantage, and agree with your characterization of it's threat to decentralization as remaining unaddressed.

Perhaps you're tired, and did not understand the comment. Regardless of why you didn't understand the comment, your reply indicates you did not understand it.

tl;dr

  1. I do only discuss DPoS, and not some other mechanism.
  2. the problem I discuss is disproportionate representation of stake in the present witness voting mechanism, not DPoS at all.

" The difference between their hodlings is 999,900 Steem. The difference in the weight of their influence on governance however is 29,997,000 Steem."

How is that DPoS?

  1. I do specifically address the founder's stake and agree with you that it has been a threat as long as Steem has existed, that the witnesses have not resolved.
  2. I did not address the founder's stake or exchanges abstaining from voting in this comment, but agree they must abstain, and have said so elsewhere.

I don’t agree that casting equal votes somehow makes the playing field unfair.. and this all is completely irrelevant from my post tbh. So in my current very busy schedule, I will not be taking the time to debate something that I feel is completely irrelevant. Whether stake should be able to cast 30 votes, and therefore “control consensus” is a fair question, but considering any changes to decrease this could be simply countered by making multiple accounts sort of defeats the purpose. Imo.

I appreciate your opinions and will look back on the decisions of this that have been brought up, but I think the idea behind it is quite flawed imo.

Whether stake should be able to cast 30 votes, and therefore “control consensus” is a fair question, but considering any changes to decrease this could be simply countered by making multiple accounts sort of defeats the purpose. Imo.

No. Creating multiple accounts would not allow you to circumvent anything, since those accounts would now have less voting power. So if we reduced the max vote to let's say 5. And you still want to control all 20 witness positions, you would need 4 times more STEEM than before. Because in order to get in 20 witnesses you would need 4 different accounts each voting 5 different witnesses.

I’m for decreasing witness votes, but stated I have no interest in debating mana voting.. which apparently has pissed off some people. I don’t really care anymore 🤷‍♀️

"...casting equal votes somehow makes the playing field unfair..."

Sad you seem to misunderstand very simple math.

Try to get some rest. I know you've been busy.

No, I don’t misunderstand simple math.. I just have this horrible fault of actually understanding how the blockchain works. And for the record never attacked you here, just said I didn’t agree with the base thing you were saying needed to be fixed and therefore didn’t see the need in debating it. If you want to, go make a post about it...

Thanks, have a great week.

So, how do tokens with greater influence on governance, 30x times more influence, become equal votes? I do not understand your understanding.

Do please explain this to me, since you know how the blockchain works and understand the math. Because tokens with 30x the weight of other tokens do not seem to be equal to me.

@valued-customer you are not wrong, I'll use a solution (of sorts) to illustrate the larger problem.

Lets say we restrict any top 20 witness so it gets maxed out at 10-25% of total stake votes, and the more votes a witness has from the same account, the faster the steempower vote decays, or some counter intuitive algorithm that encourages periodic review of votes and diminishes the repeat big votes. eg. 1 SP that is a new vote has 100x more powerful (capped at 10 - 25% of stake) than 1 million SP that has voted the same account 90% of the time last 1-2 years.

Unfortunately dpos is still an oligarchy in some sorts even with 1 SP= 1Vote (vs 1 SP = 30xVote), hard to change unless stake holders becomes radical long term altruistic thinkers (aka not humans yielding power) .... E.g try telling OPEC (shieks) and Russia (putin) to start mass investing 90% of their resources into clean tech and deleverage from oil pollution for it's people's and planets sake...... it's just too much inertia (greed) to overturned.

best to hf Steem (if it's to survive) reboot a new block chain into some sort of Egalitarian-Weighted-DPOS blockchain, how that would work would probably need some gifted architectural foresight.

Such a EW-DPOS would surely encourage new ideas to be implemented quicker and equally let bad ideas die off faster, this would naturally speed up the blockchain ability to evolve faster.

or go leave some ideas with @theoretical so when he create a new social media crypto it deals with DPOS damaging weaknesses revealed by Steem's experimentation.

https://steemit.com/blockchaindev/@theoretical/c3cjk-hello-world

You made a very nice video, but DPoS is hardly perfect. Its an experiment and valued-customer is simply suggesting tweaks, not the complete removal.

Frankly, I believe we should change the stake weight to a stake amount * stake duration system. Its still a DPoS (or Techno-republic as I think of it), you still have witnesses and the general idea, but it guarantees the most loyal to the blockchain have the most influence.

It would also protect against opportunistic whales performing a hostile take over. Your stake may be nothing like Justin's, but in this system you can win by being more devoted long-term. If you and others decided it would be worth it to you to stake for a much longer duration than Justin would be comfortable with, it could be easier for you to maintain the status quo.

Justin showed us that the current system is more of "Proof of Bought Tokens" than proof of stake. If influence was based on both amount of tokens staked as well as length of the stake, then you can say its a true skin-in-the-game system.

I agree it’s very flawed, even said so in the video.. in fact dpos is so flawed I’m not sure it can achieve what we have attempted for it to do, add in an inflation pool that encourages individuals to devalue the ecosystem for a quick buck and we have the shit show we have today.

I’m aware the gentleman wants to tweak it, and I fully encourage that and have seen many talks about it. What I said, originally, is I felt like much of his ideas actually questioned the base layer of the chain. Now reading his over 20 comments on my post.. I see he simply wants to reduce the number of witness votes an account can cast, which I agree with to a point. From the first comment, that wasn’t clear.. and having seen his interactions previously.. didn’t feel like debating the base layer of the chain today. So I believe I simply agreed to disagree.. which he then needed to insult me, and spam many of my comments with nonsense.. and now has taken over my post of how apparently I’m working with the evil stakeholders or some shit .. so quite frankly.. 🤷‍♀️ I don’t have much more to say.

Fair enough, if you are being harrassed no need to respond to him. I have not been following all the comments, just that one from him was quite lengthy and caught my eye.

"I see he simply wants to reduce the number of witness votes an account can cast..."

No. I reckon you should be able to vote 1, or 500 witnesses, but your votes are based on VP, just as ordinary voting, and for witness votes that VP depletes 100%, and doesn't recharge.

This means that each Steem you vote with can only vote once. Not 30x. This means that if you have 1M Steem and Bob has 100 Steem, the difference between your stakes is 999,900 and the difference between your influence on governance is 999,900.

Each stakeholder then wields as much influence on governance as they have stake. That's what I propose, and that's what I think most people think stake weighting works like now, but does not.

That's a very interesting idea. I had only thought of simply using our current VP mechanism to deplete witness votes 100%, and not recharge them until and unless they were withdrawn, and then to recharge them 100%, which makes the code easy and pretested (for four years now), but adding a powered up time variable does have merit, if adding to coding and testing complexity.

Thanks!

I have realized how deceptively you manipulate people. I note that @ngc has long done exactly this through the @berniesanders account. I also note how the consensus has been controlled via this 30x magnification of a few massive stakes.

I also have observed the Hegelian Dialectic in operation before, the creation of a left-right divide that prevents any rapprochement between the subjects of such leadership, and see that same policy could be ongoing on Steem, through the posturing of Ned/Sun on one hand and the consensus witnesses on the other.

Working together you, Ned, and the witnesses have engineered this crisis to manipulate stakeholders into passionately supporting the oligarchical governance of Steem that has been long delivering over 90% of rewards to whales - like you.

I hadda sober up before I saw it, but I did, and now I see it. You have served (not this account, but this user, who controls the @ngc family of accounts) as a mastermind manipulating the society with your ability to adopt personae, and also to coordinate support for consensus that constitutes a cabal of profiteers from the outset of witnessing. You have long worked with @ned to do this, and may be coordinating with Tron to do so now.

"User A has 1m Steem, casts 30 votes for witness, and wields 30M Steem influence over governance. User B has 100 Steem, casts 30 votes for witness, and wields 3000 Steem influence over governance. The difference between their hodlings is 999,900 Steem. The difference in the weight of their influence on governance however is 29,997,000 Steem."

This 30x multiplication of the influence of the largest stakes on governance has enabled your cabal to maintain an iron grip on the consensus, and now has enabled Tron to utterly centralize governance using Stinc's stake with @ned's help.

Depleting witness vote VP 100% without recharge completely defeats this scheme, and that is why members of the cabal have so long pretended to fail to understand the problem and the solution, retreating to puerile misunderstanding and a posture of incompetence as is so often seen IRL politics.

DPoS is broken, and 30x magnification of the largest stake is one of the breaks that has allowed Steem to be threatened with complete centralization. These breaks have made the consensus cabal a lot of money, and pretending to be retarded has prevented rational discussion. When that failed, Bernie's bots could drive people off the platform, as has been successfully done repeatedly.

I almost sympathize with proxy.token voters at this point, except I see that their tactic is the opposite of what will decentralize governance of Steem. Supporting either side in this contest supports oligarchical dominance via magnification of stake weight on governance. Both the consensus cabal and Tron profit from the mechanism.

Supporting 1 Steem = 1 vote for witness is necessarily opposition to both overlords, not splitting support between them. I will be considering how best to proceed given this new grasp of the machiavellian political machinations you've long undertaken, and what that means in relation to establishing an actually decentralized consensus.

Thank you very much for enabling me to grasp how prone to manipulation I have been. I mean that sincerely, as few things could make me more vulnerable to overlords.

Many solutions (better than what we currently have) were mentioned by several users on here for years now, yet none of it was taken seriously. As you mentioned mostly because it would have impacted those in power. Now that they (some) are out of power, you can bet they will do everything they can to get it changed.

Some witnesses, at least one, that remain in consensus now, continue to avoid making this change, as I cited in the comment.

cat.jpg

In discussion with a consensus witness since this hostile takeover has been undertaken, I have been struck by their unwillingness to substantively address this disproportionate influence of substantial stakeholders over governance. Frankly, their approach to the matter raised a stench of undue influence that triggered the smell test, and forced failure. TBQH, they sounded exactly like Roy Liu, making statements that meant nothing. I have also discussed this with other community consensus witnesses and former consensus witnesses with less objectionable results, including agreement that this change reduces Steem's vulnerability to Sybil attack, such as it now suffers via the founder's stake deployed by Tron.

I have always considered discussion as something very important to reach the truth or to evolve ideas, conceptions, and concepts to something better and more effective, to advance and reach new frontiers.

What I have learned in recent weeks is that "critical thinking" is something rare, really rare. and as with mainstream media, populism and the FUD were widely used to advance agendas and gain more power and support. The people who are currently in power (Sun / Witnesses) here are demagogues and will do everything to keep their power intact, the population is easily controlled by playing on their emotions, their fear, their culture, their ethnicity and, more importantly, their "greed", and I think this will continue as is as long as the flux of money one the chain is mostly controlled by a few people (projects).

“Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.” ~ Henry Kissinger

The op is getting over 203$ for stating a list of known things and is more inclined toward one side (I am neutral but fuck you). I couldn’t care less about how much the post gets to be honest (we are habituated to this), but it seems that the opinions of some people matter more than the opinions of some other people (no matter how much the idea is well contracted), same as with mainstream media who control what the population know and see even though everyone has the freedom of speech or the illusion of it. I don’t know what’s worse, leaving under an ideocracy where you always loose, or a dictatorship where you have a 50/50 chance that the guy is good.

To end with, I am convinced that almost everyone knows the truth (regarding the current situation), everyone knows the solution, and everyone knows what should be done to make things better and right. But no everyone is willing to do the right thing regardless of knowing the whole picture. This is primitive and chokingly savage, people are fighting each other like a bunch of primates without any rules or native wit, because involving reason and logic will make them lose something, losing something so the ecosystem as a whole can thrive. But hey! who cares if your strategy is not ethical, the end justifies the means.

I decided that from this point on, I would not participate in any discussion that concerns the "Sun / Witnesses" situation. Not because I don't care about the chain, but rather because I believe my time would be better spent on something or a place that values my time and opinion. The solutions are just there waiting to be implemented, what’s lacking is the will to implement them, and since we are on a chain were the majority of people have unspoken contracts with each other (circle-jerking/curation projects), things will not move until people start to understand what accountability is. In politics, people say that the government is just a reflection of its population. If we keep electing people just because there is a “money” factor in the equation than the chain is doomed.

PS: I see that po also downvoted you ... maybe next time, you should try something like:

Trigger warnings: logical things involved, possible brain activity and information stimulus.

The post is getting $200 because I’ve been working for over a week behind the scenes to ensure Steem is in every news organization I can get to pick up the phone, and the people Voting it know that... but sure, bitch about rewards... this place is truly amazing...

Behind the scenes ... giving heads I guess.

and the people Voting it know that

You are pathetic and dumb as fuck, and you will always do as told. You can't even do simple math FFS, probably why they chose someone like you. An obedient secretary, zero critical thinking, zero logic, acting like a retarded parrot with a severe case of cognitive dissonance. A disgrace to the women on this chain, a puppet, a person with no honor or integrity.

There are other people more deserving than you, people who can do math, but no one gives a shit about them, probably because they don't have a pass to enter the lollipop club. Next time you want to play the PHILANTHROPIC card, at least decline the payout.

Get lost viper, we have enough grannies seeking attention here.

Keep this in mind, your lust for power and attention will cause your doom.

The clock is ticking, can you hear it? Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock ...

Now go to your Gods and ask them to downvote this comment.

I like being flagged. It means I am hitting them where it hurts.

I note that OP is effectively defending her magnification of influence her larger stake avails her. While I have resisted mentioning it, that would explain her nonsenical claim of 'equal' votes that are 30x more influential on governance.

Just base avarice and lust for power.

Sad.

I actually explained to you why I downvoted you, and you continue to bash me in comments with the most absurd accusations. I stated repeatedly these are my opinions .. and I’m not defending shit. If you want to just throw absolute bullshit out to just be heard and noticed, feel free dude.. but you’re the one who wanted to start insulting me as I said I had no interest in debating the topic you brought up at this time.. I didn’t do shit to you, and still here you are acting like a victim. Grow the fuck up.

I don't care that you flagged me or you make pretense to not have been extremely offensive. You presume to tell me how to speak, and where, and take umbrage that I don't obey.

The fact is you're misrepresenting how witness voting is influenced by 30 full weight votes, and you're defending the mechanism Sun used to take over the damn blockchain, and that is what I seek to stop.

You're changing the subject and making this about persons, and that's disingenuous, and a harm to the folks that may not understand how Sun's ~100M Steem can weigh on governance 3B Steem.

Don't claim this has nothing to do with the hostile takeover. Or that I somehow attacked you, when I addressed the matter. If your identity is so wrapped in defending the mechanism that enabled Sun to attack Steem that criticizing that hostile takeover method is an insult to you personally, then you are far less capable of rational discussion than I expect.

Cut the bullshit, and address the issue or face the consequences of your personal attacks and obscuring the attack vector we need to secure.

"User A has 1m Steem, casts 30 votes for witness, and wields 30M Steem influence over governance. User B has 100 Steem, casts 30 votes for witness, and wields 3000 Steem influence over governance. The difference between their hodlings is 999,900 Steem. The difference in the weight of their influence on governance however is 29,997,000 Steem."

This made Sun's attack more powerful, and centralizes governance on Steem. It's easy to fix, and that's why I mentioned it. All that has to be done is to use the same VP mechanism we use on all rewards voting to deplete witness votes 100%, so each Steem can only vote once on governance.

Then User A's 999,900 Steem advantage over User B gives User A 999,900 more influence on governance than User B, just as their stake allows.

Why are you trying to divert attention from it?

I’m telling you that these changes will take further discussion and most importantly - a hardfork. Which requires plenty of notice to exchanges to let them plan to update as well.

So as I’ve said repeatedly- I agree that the system needs work but it doesn’t fix the problem right now and I didn’t see the point of spending hours debating something right now that doesn’t actually fix the current issue.

I apologize that I misunderstood your first comment, there was a lot going on in it and it took reading all your other comments to even understand what problem you were attempting to address. But, as I had tried to point out with my reply - that’s not something I see value in debating at this time as its irrelevant to the current situation, as it’s not a viable solution currently.

So you can pretend this is some sort of conspiracy that I am “diverting” from or covering up for those “evil stakeholders”, or perhaps you could listen to what I’m actually saying and stop being such a dick. I don’t really care either way tbh.

I don't care either. Nothing except the capitulation of Tron will resolve the present threat to Steem, and that's the fact.

I am glad you may better understand the problem that contributed to Sun's seizure of governance of Steem, but it's basically irrelevant now, and the comunity is left between a rock and a hard place: the new overlord Justin Sun, or the legacy oligarchy that has continuously controlled governance for the benefit of a few massive stakeholders that have thereby gained the vast majority of Steem produced via inflation.

Continuing to posit that the mechanism proposed to eliminate the 30x weighting of large stakes, which is the same VP that has been tested for four years via ordinary voting, is somehow unpredictable and dangerous continues the long obfuscation and dismissal of danger of this centralization of Steem governance, and the ease of equalizing every Steem used to vote for governance, and decentralizing DPoS rationally.

Do have a nice day.

The post is getting $200 because I’ve been working for over a week behind the scenes to ensure Steem is in every news organization I can get to pick up the phone, and the people Voting it know that... but sure, bitch about rewards... this place is truly amazing...

Seriously, and then she has the nerve to get all passive-aggressive bitchy with you in the replies. What a joke.

Was this before or after he insulted me for stating I didn’t want to debate an off topic at this very moment?

True words!
I decided to stop talking about the Tron Steem saga since yesterday. Never felt freer.
Common sense, as they say, is not common at all.

I wonder if we should adopt the electoral college, that is the U.S. voting system for electing presidents. Justin Sun might be equivalent to the popular vote but with money instead of votes.

I note that the electoral college has not enabled Constitutional governance to continue unabated in the USA. Steem is broken. I see no point in replacing that with something that is as broken as American electoral politics.

America is the best. So, you hate the United States. It is the best system ever. Period. That is why people try to come here. That is why the world watches what we do.

"So, you hate the United States."

WTF?

You have no idea what I hate or love. Just because something is flawed doesn't make it hateful. Keep your judgment of my personal and uncommunicated internal views where they belong: no where.

Maybe the world watches what we do because we bomb the shit out of people around the world. Maybe not. But your knowledge of me ends where my words quit delivering it. Don't make shit up.

That means you do hate it. That confirms it. America is not bombing the world. That is whatever infiltrated America and uses America to do terrible things. But what America became is not 1776 but more 1984. America was Anakin Skywalker but the United States was seduced by the Emperor and turned into Darth Vader. But then Luke Sky Walk Trump came to try save Vader and redeem it and we are still in the middle of trying to save the USA and I believe in trying.

"...what America became is not 1776 but more 1984."

Why do you hate America? If you don't love your overlords, you can just move to China.

It's provably false to state I hate freedom, and you make that implication with your claim I hate America. It's just as applicable to you. It's a deplorable tactic to make false claims about anyone that disagrees with you. We haven't descended to it before, and I again recommend you not do it now.

People make false statements about things all the time. Stefan Molyneux wrote a book about it called The Art of the Argument. That is why I love America so much, for the foundation it stands on.

This + we have to remove proxy voting. We have many dead voters here. Users are selling their votes for a few upvotes or some other bribe and than leaves. Resetting proxy votes before important decision will be a good start.

Democracy vs Republic:

I wonder if people want Steem to be decentralized through a voting system that may resemble a democracy or even better a republic and that is a contrast from being governed through centralization. But at the same time, I wonder if a certain flavor of decentralization would then mean anarchy as in a void of power as seen with what might be a flaw in the design as seen in the fact that Tron Overlord Justin Sun was able to sneak in via buying Steemit Inc and via colluding with exchanges to take over and govern a Steem blockchain, a blockchain that should be decentralized according to many people and yet was flawed in the design by the fact that it was manipulated as seen in what Justin did.

Constitution Blockchain Code

Perhaps, we want a certain type of decentralization that is governed by the blockchain code which could be compared to like a national constitution. So, of course, Steem has blockchain code and yet it is said by many that there is a flaw in the mechanism of democracy as that can result in mob-rule as seen in how Tron was able to take over via cartels (exchanges). That's why I prefer republics over democracies.

Four Branches of Steem

I would be in favor of three or four branches of Steem to resemble that of the United States government in order to keep things balanced and perhaps we need three or four sets of witnesses, meaning a group of witnesses for each branch of the Steem blockchain or architecture.

Limited Anarchy

I prefer anarchy as a counter to authoritarianism but only to an extent. The world does not have absolute anarchy and never will. Governments generally grow excessively too often. That means people should always fight to make governments shrink.

In conclusion, Steem is still my favorite blockchain social network and I do wish it the best.

We should try to find ways to keep the voting system balanced somehow.

"The world does not have absolute anarchy and never will."

On the contrary, in fact you and everyone on Earth has complete autonomy, despite that force might be threatened or applied, and this is in fact actual anarchy. Nothing but your perceptions refutes this actual situation.

The fact is that every person on Earth is the Autarch of their sovereign life, and nothing has any potential to change that, ever.

That comes down to your definition of anarchy. There are several different definitions to anarchy and I'm not sure which one you are using. What you were saying may be as vague as a certain type of communism. But regardless of what you are saying, you know that empires rises and falls. That means no anarchy in the sense that rulers come in to rule over people. When there are no rulers in the mist of anarchy, then rulers come in and fill in that vacuum, that void, that donut hole, that absence of power, and they take advantage of it in the same way Tron Overlord Justin Sun did.

What I mean is that no matter what someone tells you, you decide what to do. If they say they're the emperor, God, the President, your mom, it doesn't matter.

They're not the boss of you.

You are. You always have been and you always will be. No one rules you.

You are without rulers over you - unless you let yourself be ruled.

Yeah, I believe in freewill.

And I still stand behind those words.. you and your lies can most definitely continue to fuck off 🙂

I just find it interesting that this was initial attitude right after the exchanges got involved. I was sidelined from the slack you're referring to, after expressing opinions against the impending softfork. I realize that some people just thought I stopped talking.

And I also realize that, whoever it was, felt that apparently scrubbing that slack was also the right decision.

No you were removed for sharing screenshots and information out of context to help back up your made up narrative... something you have a history of. Plenty of people continue to be in the slack who disagree with one another.

As far as my response.. this was after days of you and individuals spinning lies and trying to pretend like Justin and Tron were here to hug you and there was no valid concern. You are entitled to your opinions, but also it’s acceptable for others to tell you to fuck off when you use lies.

As I said, I stand behind those words still and think your continued lies are absurd.

The rest of my thoughts, about the important stuff, can be seen in the video of this post and future ones to come.

I publicly shared a couple paragraphs of what I personally wrote in the slack. In doing so, I removed any mention of the specific plan to softfork and replaced it with a general "if the witnesses do something drastic before they should" instead.

If I were cynical, I could argue that I was invited to the slack in order to keep me from talking about the general notion of preemptive action in public. And when I wouldn't stop speaking out against it, I was retroactively labeled as leaking information. <- If I were cynical.

It would be an interesting tactic if true, right?

I remember when you were added, it was due to your work in coding and some valued your input. It was an open invite group, anyone could add who they wanted.

The quote you shared involved other people’s words too.. but I had nothing to do with you being removed, so can’t really advice on that.

As far as your tactics... I don’t really care, I’ll I’ve seen are lies from you and don’t feel like spending the energy to figure out why that is. Do as you wish, but others may wish to tell you to fuck off.

The quote you shared involved other people’s words too..

You must be referring to this:

image.png

In the slack (which is probably now scrubbed) there were people who mentioned atomic swaps.

But I talked about it too before entering the slack.

but I had nothing to do with you being removed, so can’t really advice on that.

And yet:

No you were removed for sharing screenshots and information out of context to help back up your made up narrative

I paraphrased my concerns and hinted that I wasn't the only one who had these theories. Then I was quietly sidelined because, perhaps the narrative was inconvenient.

And now I'm being continuously called a liar for something that was scrubbed from the slack.

Nothing was scrubbed, free slack.. old conversations go away automatically. That wasn’t the quote you shared that was expressed as another time where you were sharing sensitive information out of context.

The quote doesn’t even matter at this point imo as your actions after have been very clear... as far as being called a liar, I think you have made plenty of posts full of lies to give anyone enough reason to call you such. I wasn’t even referring to what you leaked when I said that tbh.

Like I've always said, they always knew what they were doing. It was clear that there was a misunderstanding. But a select group of people decided to move to protect their own interests.

"... it’s acceptable for others to tell you to fuck off when you use lies."

Well. Let's consider this then:

"I don’t agree that casting equal votes somehow makes the playing field unfair.. and this all is completely irrelevant from my post tbh."

Since that's a response to my comment discussing how Tron took over governance of Steem, which is the point of the OP, and in reference to the 30x magnification of the weight of Tron's stake, which facilitated it's takeover, the above quote from you is factually incorrect.

You then state:

"I don’t misunderstand simple math.. I just have this horrible fault of actually understanding how the blockchain works. And for the record never attacked you here..."

After you flagged my reply, which is clearly understood as an attack.

So, you're lying.

Fuck off.

No I flagged your comment as I didn’t agree it should be on the top and was over rewarded. It’s not an attack, it was using a tool provided by the platform we are on... and it wasn’t even a full downvote.. if I wanted to attack you it would seem fair to use my full downvote and any trail that follows.

I’m sorry that you are offended I don’t want to debate you on a topic I see as irrelevant, and then you decided to then insult me... but quite frankly I still think the idea you are so desperate to discuss is irrelevant and based on complete ignorance. So 🤷‍♀️

Who said I was offended? Your assumptions are revealing.

I am not saying you're a liar only because you attacked me by flagging me. I'm saying you're a liar for claiming 30x weighted stake is equal votes, and that you understand the math and how blockchains work.

All three of the latter things cannot be true, and you know it, so you're lying.

I am not offended by that. I oppose it. I expect it from you, and your trail. Making such false statements knowingly is why this post is supported as it is by those that have profited from this 30x weighting of the stake of your supporters.

I do want you to fuck off. You are.

Good.

Sounds good.. please mute me and get off my comments then. 👋🏼

Was freezing Justin Suns legal property, illegal. NO spin, No narrative.
The community deserves an answer to that question.
We honestly cant even debate what occurred without clarifying that point.

  1. Witnesses choosing to decline specific transactions is very normal, and they have every right to do so. Especially if they feel the security of the chain depends on them doing so.

  2. Steemit inc stake that has previous agreements attached to it is very different than “Justin’s private property”... so I understand why you keep screaming that, but if you can’t even acknowledge the difference then it’s clear you are just attempting to troll and not worth talking to. As we are discussing a dev fund that was acquired in a very specific way and that makes it unique.

Now... go make your own post and stop spamming mine.

SOrry , not spamming wanted to make sure you where aware of my question. YOu replied and i will only comment in response to your comment. Understand the answer to these questions change everything.

  1. So , no they did not get legal advice. Got it. thank you

  2. Actually, no there is no difference. Steemit inc stake had no legal agreements attached to them. The witnesses would have produced them by now. So your saying ned doesnt have to pay Taxes on the stake he sold to Justin? Really?

Witnesses don't have a legal obligation to run any code.

I was sidelined from the slack you're referring to, after expressing opinions against the impending softfork.

As you’ve already acknowledged, that’s not why you were removed.

And I also realize that, whoever it was, felt that apparently scrubbing that slack was also the right decision.

It was a decision made by multiple people and as far as I know, nothing was “scrubbed.” It’s a free Slack, so it’s possible that comments were eventually archived after a period of time.

As Justine has already noted, many people disagree with each other in that Slack. But you already know this...it just doesn’t happen to fit into your particular narrative.

🍿 get your 🍿! Too shelf drama right ITT

!dramatoken

!popcorn

This is from a week ago.. not really sure how it’s popcorn worthy

Like fine wine, think drama often gets better w age. 🥂

!dramatoken


Such drama, you've earned a DRAMA!

To view or trade DRAMA go to steem-engine.com.

Haha. It's funny because you guys have twisted values.

I only bend over when I have something to pick up... and even then I look if there's someone behind me. 😉


Here's your DRAMA. Don't spend it all in one place!

To view or trade DRAMA go to steem-engine.com.

Sometimes don't you wish you were wrong?

I think many shared your exact same concerns regarding the soft fork, yet it was pushed through anyways, and the worst case scenario played out. It may have been slightly about protecting the chain, but make no mistake it was also about the top witnesses keeping their jobs.

Sometimes don't you wish you were wrong?

I was wrong. I had no on-chain evidence, but neither did they. I am myopic to on-chain evidence for protecting the chain. I don't apologize for that.

I thought the community would take the attack on DPoS seriously. I thought Tron wouldn't respond at all. Or, I thought if they responded, I thought they'd work within the protocol (because there did exist a technical response that did not involve getting the exchanges involved).

I initially thought that when the exchanges did get involved, they only used Tron's exchange balances, which would have been slightly defensible, but the math didn't work out once you investigated that. By the way, a cool-headed response to exchange funds would have been to assume they only used Tron's balances and tweet that Tron must have 90% of the liquidity.

Witnesses who want to keep their jobs is a given. I don't blame them one bit for that. But this "dev fund" they're fixated on seems to be the linchpin to the entire platform, which is hilarious.

Because if that stake is allowed to vote, they likely don't keep their jobs, simple as that.

Which stake is that? The Steemit inc stake? As you realize the community has countered that.. correct? The fact that Poloniex customer funds are still being used and the idea that we have 20 sock puppets nodes being voted is the issue.. not that “witnesses want to keep their jobs”.

You seem bitter and unwilling to look at actual facts.. the Steemit inc stake is being countered. So I guess I’m confused what your grief is exactly.

Sure, that would be up in the air, but not a certainty, especially now that the community is less apathetic.

But even before breaking up the apathy, I'm not convinced the "dev fund" would have lead to absorption.

Scroll of Truth hahahahaa

Thanks for the history lesson, I think its important for all of us to know as much as possible before we make our decisions. I honestly think even if this results in a fork its still a pretty amazing case study of how decentralisation and old style of corporate governance does not mix and you'll need to find a new mix to work together.

Lol if anything this is a very expensive lesson for everyone, but we won't be alone there will be plenty of blockchains that go through shit and some will just die from it. A lot of the capital in the space is just speculation and eventually, it will be squeezed out of the chancers as some start to develop and pull away from the pack.

I think a lot has happened here worth saving and if so, more power to the people I say

Yes I think the backstory and the things that led up to the decision of the softfork are important to know and I hadn’t seen it covered yet (I may have missed it).. as sometimes narratives get twisted and it’s hard to know the truth.

I do agree that no matter what happens, this most definitely is a story for the history books.

heard you were spreading drama with your usual flavor of love...just drop by to get my fill :P

Nah, I was just trying to take the time to share my experiences and to give information for anyone who wanted it... as I didn’t make a post everyday to tell about the amount of hours I spent working on PR to ensure Steem was in the news.. you know.. the usual thing to do around here, tell everyone how amazing you are in a shit post everyday. Then was then met with trolling from accounts who hold no stake, yell really loudly and insult people and then bitch about being treated badly. I’m trying to remember why exactly I was trying to help save this place tbh 😃

But good to see you DJ, I missed you ❤️

Muuaaahh, miss u 2 ❤️ ..... also u look great on ytube, keep the tussled hair look, suits u.

p.s. you're too good for all them sensitive and salty steemians :P

Random comment about STEEM related things just so I could feel like I fit in.

Random reply not about Steem as I think you are lovely and here is a cookie 🍪 🤗

Technical response to this. Roughly seven paragraphs and a few images to help prove my point. Some math. A Ned meme. No profanity which is unlike me but I wanted to be taken seriously for a change and sometimes you gotta make sacrifices. All that just to say I agree, feel humbled, and would like to say thanks. Then I later added 'you ain't so bad yourself' with a quick edit.

Rip TL;DR

I did watch some and try to read some of the comments and I'm sure you opinion is great and I'm not the most concise person either and this sentence is getting kinda long and why am I even writing this.

TY for your efforts nonetheless.

Hahah, I’m so sorry.. it’s sooo long. It’s truly just me walking through the experience and probably not beneficial in the slightest. But for some random points that maybe people didn’t know leading up to the SF -

TDLR

  • witness chat was not closed door, had open invite up until last week. So not this “secret club” being made out to be. More people probably could have been there, some maybe were over looked in the chaos, but it wasn’t a closed club.

  • I feel the witnesses acted the best on the information they had and the hostile marketing Coming out of Tron. Much of which has been described as a “misunderstanding”.. but witnesses were given information that the sale actually was contingent on things like the token swap, so it wasn’t just miscommunication.

  • Communication was attempted by the witnesses to Tron multiple times for nearly a week; it was repeatedly denied by Eli from Steemit inc and Tron.

  • then I just explained the ninja mine a bit for those that weren’t aware of how it came to be.

The rest was just me rambling through a time line.

Thanks for your comment 🙏

Its a very good summary. Thank you ","

I picked up most of that from skipping around.

I have essentially tmsame reason.

I think too many people were sympathetic because they thought Tron people wsre ignorant of Steem and dPOS and Ned took advantage.

I don't believe this is the case, they hired people, they didn't care, the managed to wreck 22.2 very quickly. I don't think this is the action of someone who doesn't have a plan or know what they are doing.

Tron was being shady and quiet. 22.2 got em talking for better (or worse).

Thanks for your clear minded informations...

Here is an audio version of the video from @justineh's parent post.

grnsmspkgood.png

The origianl article featuring the video: https://steempeak.com/@justineh/my-personal-thoughts-steem-tron-saga

The original video on Youtube here:

Or here:

This is the direct link for the audio: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1f-bw4i82MFyjyCTPtcPoLHFNcZi1O5fL

If someone could upload this audo file to IPFS that would be awesome.

Enjoy!

When i read about the pop network, that got "robbed" by Tron Boy, i saw even more Red Flags...

How that was handled was very hard to watch, and due to the ability to control the narrative .. it’s something that went almost completely unnoticed unfortunately

control the narrative.? You and the witnesses have done a great job!
Hostile take over?
Freezing a large investors legal property is Hostile. If illegal then a Hack!
When will you and the witnesses come forward with a legal opinion on the freezing of legal property. The community has a right to know if Justin Suns account being frozen was legal. If legal then its not a hack and the witnesses are not hackers. Then we can move on to the actions of the exchanges. That is step one.

Then go hire an attorney... and perhaps look at facts when you throw out ridiculous statements on behalf of Tron.

So your saying the witnesses , froze 12 million of Justins legal property without any legal advice?
The community needs to know if the witnesses acted legally.
IF you dont know just say you dont know.
I dont act on behalf of tron , i act as a steemian trying to get down to the truth. THe witnesses , voting bots, and whales are controlling the trending page. THe CNN of steemit.

Dude.. take your meds and stop spamming me.

lol. Just red wine. ( organic)
Was just trying to figure you and the witnesses out. Your support team etc.
Trolling yes, spamming no.
Honestly im done, got the answer i wanted , understand i targeted you because your part of the witness group and i wanted to figure out the logic behind the decision to freeze the account. The lack of answer says everything. Always, acting in the best interest of the chain. I believe steem has the best utility on the planet. THe inflation distribution is it only downfall. Plus what just occurred.
Best, Test45

They cannot answer this because they acted illegally. There's never been any legal thingy with them from the onset. They keep rambling about how Tron took over the chain yet they ignore the genesis of the 'takeover'; Freezing Sun's legally acquired stake before even having a conversation.

Assholes!!

They also just censored my comments with downvote bots . They took my reputation down to negative. Just for asking those questions. They need to go.
Im 100% behide SUn now. They are censoring anyone who even thinks of supporting Sun or question the witnesses actions.

@justineh I am currently working on an audio version of the video featured in this post. I want to know if you approve me posting it in the comments here once I have it remastered and is uploaded.

This is a good summation of things and think that it should be spread and especially so to places where such video sites are censored.

Cheers!

Lol at "stealers". Justin a football fan?

We calling thieves "stealers" now?

I can see him say it.

Very interesting talk @justineh - Now I finally understand where this "not" pre-mined stack is coming from. Thanks! :))

Glad I could help with that, as I think that history is important and while the information is out there, sometimes it’s easier to absorb in video form.

That was long, but I am enjoying listening to people chat on the subject.

As far as Tron voting for its own witnesses, I think it's fair to mention that they did this allegedly due to 3 Super Reps refusing to respond to requests to upgrade their boxes. I'm pretty sure (prior to 2 weeks ago anyway) that if any of our top 20 didn't respond when new code was put forward, they would be out in a matter of days.

Anyway, I was pretty confident that this move on Tron would mean battle stations over here, and the rest as they say, is history.

Personally, I don't think Justin is not going to go for any middle ground (partial burn, SPS donations) and think the only outcome here is a HF. Short term pain for long term gain, I hope.

Yes that was their response to the Tron communities outrage.. just like the Hardfork’d the Steem chain to protect it from hackers 🙂

I don’t know much more than what I’ve heard from those within Tron on the matter - that that excuse was bs

lol, well I know the 'hackers' talk was absolute shite, but I've yet to see someone show that 3 Super Reps were or were not running old software for a month before Tron booted them out with 3 socks.

If I knew where to look I would do some digging.

'm pretty sure (prior to 2 weeks ago anyway) that if any of our top 20 didn't respond when new code was put forward, they would be out in a matter of days

That's just not correct. There are numerous cases (at least two I can think of immediately) on Steem where witnesses have refused to update to new code that was put forward and were not out in a matter of days.

The developers don't get to unilatearlly jam whatever code they want down the community's and witness's throats, except on a centralized sham of a chain like Tron.

The way the system works is that witnesses opposed to an update have the prerogative to not adopt it. It is then up to those who want it adopted to convince those against and/or make changes to address the concerns and attract broader support for it.

I'm no Ned fan but to his credit, apart from one exception, he actually respected this aspect of the system enough to refrain from using the Steemit stake to centralize the chain. Justin, on the other hand, appears to repeatedly show himself to be someone who wants to be a dictator, using any means he can to get his way regardless of what anyone else thinks.

Let me put it another way. If the vast majority, but not the supermajority of consensus witnesses had upgraded but there were a few who were uncontactable after repeated attempts, they would be out. I say this partly because our 'original' top 30 or so were so tightly bunched that one whale vote had the potential to make a difference.

This could be a moot point and not actually what happened over a tron, but i don't remember a time on Steem where the majority were held waiting for a month before uncontactable/silent consensus witnesses were finally ousted.

This could be a moot point and not actually what happened over a tron, but i don't remember a time on Steem where the majority were held waiting for a month before uncontactable/silent consensus witnesses were finally ousted.

That's entirely reasonable and correct, but ask yourself why it didn't happen that way on Tron.

Why didn't the other voters simply kick these SRs? Clearly they had some disagreement with Justin over whether that was needed or even advisable.

I wish I knew more about the situation. It’s strange to think that these 3(?) could keep themselves in consensus if the remainder didn’t support their non-action.

What they need is a place where the masses could document such a thing...oh...

Prior to the sale of Stinc to Tron, you think Stinc would have voted out those witnesses? Do cite priors. It's never happened before.

Well no, because they didn't.

Justin voting witnesses on the Tron network just a few days after buying Steemit Inc. was pretty unsubtle though.

I actually wrote about it being a test, as a complete joke, but the more things progress, the more i think it was an act to incite action from our previous 20.

Well, you made the point that Justin using the genesis stake to replace Tron Super Representatives was analogous to Steem witnesses being replaced for the same reason, and this would then involve not the community voting witnesses in or out, but Stinc.

It is not analogous at all, because the Tron voters didn't replace those witnesses. Sun did.

That's not what I meant.

I hear he used the genesis stake on Tron to boot out witnesses who refused to even respond 'for over a month' to any communication. And that this would never be the case here, with witnesses working together towards a code update, and the fact they were so tightly bunched. There is/was a slack for communication, and forks were generally adopted within a few hours once the first had switched.

Apparently work is still going on hostile take over with just 8 witnesses in the top 20 now.

Yes that is mainly due to the @proxy.token account (with a very large proxy) voting some of the Tron sock puppets accounts due to (in their own words) trying to "hold the balance". I actually believe this is a very bad and actually a huge security risk to the chain. Having multiple nodes in consensus who have shown inability to do so competently (can't even update price feeds) is a very bad decision and if we saw any technical issues come up with them there, could be detrimental to the chain.

I understand the KR community wanting to keep a balance, but I don't quite think they understand the risk they are taking by doing so. I'm going to try to cover that a bit in the next video. As it is concerning to me.

You'd rather they did your biddings, wouldn't you?
I set them as my proxy because it seems they're the only ones not blindly picking sides here. Everyone else is rabid like 12-year-olds about how Tron took over the chain.

You pulled a gun and Justin pulled out a bigger one.
Go cry to mama!

I have no bidding, dear. I just don’t think voting for one person running 20 nodes is a great decision from a security stand point, as I said.

Hold the balance to secure their account funds which where frozen.
ONe fact which is certain is this was a reaction to his account being frozen. Freezing his account was a hostile action to him and all large account holders. IT showed that large stake holders must answer to the current witness central authority or risk having the funds frozen. Now justins lawyers claim this was illegal, if so then the witnesses are hackers. WHen will the witnesses come forward with legal advice supporting their actions of freezing legal property?

No matter how many times you say it.. it doesn’t make it true.

I look forward to you and your attorneys analysis of this situation. Have a wonderful week!

Why wont you answer a simple question.
Did the witnesses get legal advice when they decided to Freeze 12 million dollars of Justin Suns legal property. ?
The community deserves the answer to that question.
All account holders should know the answer to that question.

Interesting post.
Flagged for disagreement on rewards.

I was going to comment with “that’s totally fair 🙂” but then realized you went through to also upvote comments that were insulting for no reason.. so cool.. thanks for stopping by 👍🏼

Good reply from your side.

I agree that @valued-customer should have left out the "simple math" part, which I shouldn't have upvoted, but he is correct in saying that a reduction of the number of witness votes would make it less easy to attack STEEM like it just happened. Let me give you a simplified example:

Assuming you have exactly 900 SP and there are exactly three Witnesses, then you can vote any Witness with exactly 900 SP.
Let's assume that you can only vote for one Witness out of three due to the restriction I suggest and therefore distribute your 900 SP to three accounts in order to be able to continue to vote for three Witnesses. Then each of these three accounts has 300 SP. So you can only vote for each Witness (one with each account) using 300 SP.

Have a nice day!

Yes, and I responded to him somewhere that most definitely I see things that need to be improved with the current set up, but those fixes will need a Hardfork. Which will require weeks of coding, testing, advance notice to exchanges and planning etc. So for me it’s not a viable fix to the current issue we are in, so I didn’t see the value in spending the time debating the specifics of it at this time. Others most definitely can, I was just stating I didn’t feel it was a good use of my personal time currently.

Honestly I’ve always supported the update to witness votes; haven’t thought much about the idea of it being a set up where your SP is divided by all your votes. My immediate thought is it would make it easier for one stakeholder to get a sock puppet account into top 20, but haven’t looked at the logistics enough to have a full opinion on the matter.

And while I think these discussions are most definitely important for further improvement of the DPoS design, it wasn’t something I wanted to sit and debate at that time.. and thought I was politely saying so. Plus, with my experience with that specific user, he had gone way off on his ideas and it’s hard to even pinpoint the core of what he’s trying to say. I should have taken more time to do so, but also.. I have no desire to speak to someone who is rude, argumentative and driven mad by conspiracy theories to where it seems his whole entire point is to argue for the sake of it.

With all that being said, I can acknowledge that my response perhaps came off aggressive (it was not intended) and that somehow made him going into more of attack mode, but quite frankly I’m not going to deal with someone attacking and then playing victim after, I would rather just ignore them going forward.

Anywho, my original comments were made quickly while I was at work, so now that I have a minute I wanted to make more detailed ones.

I feel an update to the witness voting is needed, and am aware it’s been discussed often while trying to find a clear solution. I hope we see improvements on this matter in the future.

Dear Justineh,

I am Harry and a sort of newbie.
I think I could help you or some english speaking Steemians understand other groups’ opinions. So give this comment.

Thanks for your valuable opinion. It’s my pleasure and helpful to understand what you and old witnesses think.
Please let me give you simple feedback that may be some other group members think now as far as I know.
I am a sort of newbie so do not understand many things. But because of that, I could be a sort of objective. I am not on any side or biased.

  1. I understand some part of it why you and past witnesses insist on some core value like “Decentralization” and some other ones.
    But it seems some witnesses or you may be a lack of understanding about other community's “emotion” and opinions. This could be a different issue from Justin or Tron.
    I think that because up to now you and your side hasn’t needed to understand. You and past witnesses‘ side are a sort of center of this steem world having made big decisions and relevant benefit. So it seems to be related to what doesn’t respect other groups opinions(at least emotionally). So some other communities don’t believe past witnesses side direction. Many members think former witnesses group try to keep their sole absolute power and wealth from Justin and new trend. Someone may believe that in (up to now)decentralized world, past witnesses and relevant group were a sort of governor of that world controlling all like a king or god.

  2. And Justin seems to be a businessman pursuing benefit. For him, decentralization or other ideal ideology would be meaningless. That may be very crucial fact for many steemians. But it may be true.
    I do not have any power or enough knowledge about steem. so not many reason to be on Justin’s side. Just my small view.

  3. There is a clear language and culture barriers between groups or steemians. But you may not feel that seriously. You may not need that seriously up to now. Because you have been in the center of the power and steem culture. Still english language, culture and some groups are the center of this world. Some believe that other culture and language are not regarded as important considerations.
    Even though you cannot learn new culture or language, at least try to understand a variety of culture or language.

  4. I think you and old witnesses may be better to approach this issue step by step. First, try to explain your understanding to other groups, not pursuing them. Just explain. and step by step, you try to accept the others as a partner, but not as targets that should be on your side and giving SP to help some witnesses. It could be failed or not. But at least try.

266$, good job single mom from the rural USA

:*

Hello angry Serbian man who can’t do math! Thanks for stopping by!

No, no, only highschool girls can't

;)

Try this

X(steem) x 150% >> (X+Y (steem per post)) x 10%

All you dropouts should do is to be quiet and make Justin pump the price

Just a group of coordinated friends trying to save their source of income by controlling the people they feed every day. They call them 'community'.