You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steem Governance is Multiparty
For ease of evaluation of witnesses, will there be a core standard that all (esp top 20) must adopt? If each witness has vastly different ideas, it makes it near impossible to track.
"Must adopt?" According to whom? If the community of stakeholders come to a consensus over core standards, they are the only ones who can "force" the witnesses to do anything. So if you want there to be core standards that the witnesses have to adopt, then you--and everyone who agrees with you--has to come together to develop those standards and enforce them with your vote. That is the point that we are trying to communicate. There is no benevolent dictator who is going to solve these problems for us. We have to come together as a community to develop common standards. We don't have to agree on EVERYTHING, but we have to at least agree on the standards to which we will hold one another. That being said, I think we are already well on our way toward doing this. I think this is more about maturing as a community, improving our tools, and improving incrementally how we communicate with one another. We just have to keep evolving and improving as a community. This isn't about paradigm shifts, it's about iterative change in a positive direction.
Must was the wrong word.
I meant that a standard core that they agree upon that gives some kind of base from which to work, a minimum level. I read @reggaemuffin's proposal but for the average user (myself included) it is going to be very difficult to get the head around without expert understanding let alone if there are 50 variations versions floating around in posts lost to time etc.
So will there be a proposal put forward that can be tweaked by discussion to reach some standard form that a witness can agree to and then we as community can vote accordingly based on at least that base level of standardization. And then the possibility to see clearly which witnesses agreed to it and which didn't?
It is already difficult to know what all the witnesses are working on etc so having some way to know that there is at least a base level met would make things somewhat easier to track for less technical users who don't live 24/7 on Steem or in the processes of software development.
Of course, it is up to the community to develop the interfaces, the understanding and our responsibility to keep track of the 200+ witnesses and their comings and goings each day but it might be easier with a tool or two.
Hmm, in a sense I get you Taraz. It's complicated to track down the platforms of many witness candidates you'd evaluate for voting. And certainly it would be even more difficult for people who barely know what witnesses are, if they will be interested at all. How would we convince them to take time and evaluate every witness they vote for at length? That's nearly impossible.
Adhering to common standards may simplify things. But Steem governance will resemble more and more with real life political arena, and it seems many want to go as far from those models as possible. We'd just give birth to parties and doctrines this way.