RE: Abused by @abusereports
To me it seems beyond repair to be honest.
Do you have any proactive, productive suggestion to bring to the table?
The distribution problem may be beyond repair. I'm not sure. Maybe SMTs and their Oracles will bring some competition. Maybe EOS will bring competition. I don't know. I do know that throwing our hands up in the air and saying, "Welp, it's hopelessly broke" will never get it fixed unless we first recognize what is broken and then follow it up with what we thing a good fix is. I've asked @berniesanders to define spam in witness-social steem chat and he hasn't replied yet. I think @transparencybot is an interesting service that I, personally, would like to support as I don't think bit bots fit with the intent of "proof of brain," and I personally think there's value in knowing which posts were organically voted for and which posts were bitbotted up by the author of the post.
If @transparencybot is spamming and not providing value, I'll remove my delegation for it. If on the other hand it does provide value, I'll keep it and ask those who disagree to explain why.
Luke,
Thanks for the reply. I truly believe one if not the most significant problems on this website is uncontrolled bullying by a few very large stake holders. The retention rate is dismal, all but the most hardened souls or perhaps completely oblivious can or do stay. And of course those that find a angle to profit are likely to the last to leave, fighting it out for the last piece of ...
Nothing wrong with profit, except when it is at the full expense of others.
Proof of brain is failing because:
If a few larger players do not come together soon and address these issues, Steem will go back to its .09 where it started its huge run up. Huge investments will be lost.
What can be done.
Don't sit by and allow obvious bullying and nefarious collisions to remain. Get a pack and do some down voting or up vote those who get downvoted for simply raising an opinion or questing the ugly truths.
In other words, get a "Council" formed that works to inject a little fairness back into the system. A block of even 10 larger stake holders could make a power difference that would certainly catch on to grow to hundreds. Voting could be put in place of some sort, based on 1 vote one (real account).
There are many solutions, it is not to late, but it really is time to start.
Quite frankly -no. I just thought openness was a real good idea. What lies in the cards regarding software upgrades and such is a wait and see game. I could not tell since I don't read a line of code.
What you do is your choice, Luke. It always is. For my part I will continue to support what I believe is a constructive and informative initiative. Naturally I can't change the world, at least I died trying.
Ah, and what if choice is an illusion? Heheh.
I know for a fact that it isn't. Not on a personal level at least. When meandering into government and justice system it gets narrower. But personally I have chosen to live when I could easily have died. I did that from experience, intuition and determination. That's no illusion. And hardly a matter of turning on and off switches. More like how much on and how much off. Something that doesn't exist in the binary world view. Which is much to simplistic.
Well, well. Slightly off topic. To my surprise my computer copes with me with the occasional kernel panic. Whatever that is. Something on-off.