You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why I won’t be compromising with Justin Sun
Disagree with implementation there, although SP limit does make sense. I was looking at changing number of witness votes, even a 51% attack gets hard when you have to figure out how to split that 51% amongst 4 witness votes, and still have all 4 in top 20, just to get a veto.
We are in agreement that more massaging of the witness voting scheme needs doing. Yet to carry old baggage to the new incarnation of the chain seems to be setting things up to fail in advance. If STINC's was the only ninja mined coin, then a surgical @null|Mr. Sun makes sense yet it was not. Now @freedom will have greater influence and Bernie can be an even bigger bully.
This is exactly what I was talking about re: Bobinson about ninja stake vs. governance issues. I'm totally ok talking about bernie and freedom once governance is stable and, imo, fixed by not allowing the outsized influence. If freedom could only vote 1 witness, and that guy got #1 bc of it, I don't care tbh. It's when one person can control a supermajority of witnesses that I have issues, and that's my issue w/ governance overall. ninja mine would have been a lot less of an overall issue, if it could only control 1 witness per steem.