RE: Steemit Winter Update: 2017 reflection, our Vision Statement and Mission, and a look forward
Well, Steemit is a privately held company, so no matter how good of an idea you and I think it is - it is 100% up to them what to do with their stake. We as a community (even as stakeholders) actually have no right to tell them what to do in that regard.
With that said, I think it would do a lot of good, but it would do a lot of harm too. No matter how 'fair' they are, there are going to be disputes over fairness. It is also going to put a huge burden on Steemit to have to police and manage the whole thing. It is also going to put Steemit in a position of picking winners and losers on the platform. It is also going to make the people that are buying SP in order to have influence feel like their purchases are being invalided, because why pay for SP if you can just get it delegated from Steemit for free. So in my view, while it would do good solving one problem - it would create others in it's place, and I don't think the new problems would put us in a better place than our current problems.
Steemit is using their stake to help projects like Utopian.io be successful. There has been a lot of good to come from that, but there are actually also a lot of people that are complaining about the unfairness with that. In my view there have been some successes and some failures with that. I'd like to see it continue, but it would be nice if there was less unfairness in the distributions, and abuse on behalf of the people receiving them.
I completely agree, the steemit.inc steem is privately held, making it their choice. However there is simply no getting away from the fact that the only reason for such a massive advantage was nurturing steem and to date, best intentions aside, they have not (in my opinion) been able to deploy it effectively. Who can blame them, they would need massive help.....which they could get from the community. They have a duty to honour that genesis and we all share an obligation to hold them to account for it.
Steemit.inc would be no more responsible for picking winners and losers than anyone. The entire solution only works if it is driven by the community and the community take responsibility for its effectiveness. The only large holders of SP that would be disincentivised by a community led abuse prevention initiative of this scale, I submit are investors no-one wants in steem anyway. There will always be disagreements...humans ;) that is why arbitration is necessary. It is also why ensuring the definition of abuse has broad community consensus and is as clear as possible. Ensuring those entrusted with delegations act with integrity is critical and no easy task....but it can all be done. Just because it seems difficult is no reason not to do it. Both steemit.inc and the community could mobilise to build tools that further support accountability.
All of this solution is what we are all currently doing in a fragmented inefficient manner anyway. If steemit.inc agreed to this, if we deploy it effectively, in the end steem would be far less abusive, there would be a greater consensus that the steem community was more aligned, those outside would get a far better impression of steem, the chance of SMT's and communities working better increases dramatically and hopefully that would translate (once sign-up is improved) into massive growth and increase in steem price.
It's a win-win for steemit.inc as they are only delegating stake. That would still leave the issue of further decentralising it but that is for another day! Have a great weekend bud! I'm working the whole weekend but at least the sun is shining right now :)