RE: Witness voting and the security of the chain.
This is a very interesting and debate provoking post @thehive, so thank you for publishing it. I think your suggestion about vote renewals every 6 or 12 months is good, because it requires Steemians to refresh or update their witness choices in accordance with what those witnesses are doing and how they are operating. In shot it helps to keep everyone on their toes. However, I am certainly not of the opinion any KYC requirements should be introduced.
In relation to giving the right to veto I do not agree with this option, like you don't. I don't know if you were in Discord the other night when Ned came into one of the servers to directly speak to the community but he suggested that Steemit Inc is given the right to a veto. I was almost laughing, I mean seriously how convenient would that be for Steemic Inc. I actually couldn't believe Ned was suggesting this seriously after everything that Justin Sun has done this past week in his failed attempt at taking over the Steem blockchain. I know Ned is obviously quite desperate to allow some kind of emergency fork to be implemented so exchanges like Binance can do a quick power down and get liquid Steem back in to their customers wallets, but that's there problem. I was always 50/50 with Ned but after the other night I am now 99/1 against the guy.
In relation to reducing the amount of witness votes any witness can receive sorry but I kind of lost you there and what you were saying.
As regards Justin Sun I do believe that he does want to genuinely increase the value of Steem, which is good news for all of us. He has a lot of tech, resources and outreach at his disposal and we should remember that. If he adopts the right approach to the community and doesn't attempt unhelpful manoeuvres like hostile takeovers then hopefully something good can come of Tron's ownership of Steemit Inc.
You make me look bad, Your reply is longer than my post lol
Yes I am sure the KYC would fail from conversations I have heard but something needed to be there to be dismissed by the top witness straight away so they would at least consider the rest.
The veto I say here is more from elected people like yourself on the chain that are not a witness having the ability to veto when a fork might have a negative influence on the lower levels that never get heard. Very hard to find a decent balance with it though and I am unsure that it would really work well. Bribes and shit would be done behind the closed doors I feel.
He profits with a higher Steem price Justin sun we all do, Maybe his goal is to increase the price sell the 65 million Steem and bugger off from Steem,
Ha! Sorry I didn't mean to make you look bad lol. Thanks for explaining what you meant about the right to a veto and yes that's an engaging proposition, I think it could prove useful in helping ensure a wider system of governance that includes the 'little people' get their right to a say.
no one looks bad when it is a discussion. If people see bad their mind is closed