I unvoted all top 20 witnesses in protest of how HF20 went.

in steemit •  13 days ago

HF20 was a...
hmm...
disappointment!

image.png

Source - Pixabay

<rant>

In protest of how HF20 went, I have unvoted all top 20 witnesses.

  • Nothing personal. I really like several of you and will likely vote for you again.
    • However, I feel HF20 was a major disappointment.
      • And the witnesses are supposed to "protect us" from such mistakes.

I've read several witness posts

  • promising this and that in the future
    • with great ideas how to not ever have this happen again
      • ...

I received excellent training in the US Navy to be an Electronic Tech. They taught a 7 step troubleshooting procedure. The first 6 had to do with identifying and fixing the problem. After upgrading to HF20.5, apparently, the problems were identified and fixed.

Step #7

Discuss and come up with a plan about:

  • what could we have done better?
    • Is there a way we could improve on the process next time?
      • ...?

This apparently isn't the first time a HF has screwed things up. How can that be?

  • Oh, Step #7 was never done.

In protest
of what happened during HF20 upgrade
I have unvoted ALL top 20 witnesses
Perhaps you should, too!

My personal feelings

How in the world did everyone miss that no one would be able to use the platform after the upgrade, because voting power and RCs got zeroed out?

  • what could have been done better?
    • Is there a way to could improve on the process next time?

I believe each hard fork should only be 1 major upgrade at a time.

How about we, steemians, get to vote on the success or failure of the HardFork?

  • If we (as a democracy where 1 person gets 1 vote) decide it was a failure, all top 20 witnesses cannot receive any blocks for an entire month.

Everything we do
and
everything we don't do
has consequences.

  • Or, at least they should!

I know me removing my votes for these witnesses will not change a thing.
But, at least I get to make a statement.

  • Will you join me?

I know the 2 or 3 people who read this post and say, YEAH! I'm unvoting in protest, too, will not change a thing.
But, at least we got to make a statement.

  • If enough of us make a statement, maybe someone will hear!

All it will take is to get 1 top 20 witness who will stand up and do what is right, and we will never have another fiasco like happened with HF20.

  • I believe that is correct, right? All 20 have to upgrade before it becomes official?
    • Will you be my witness? :D

</rant>

look.gif

Check out the easiest 14.3 Steem I ever made!

My post about it...

look.gif

Dustsweeper Footer 2 use this one.png
Meaning you can't
waste your vote

look.gif

wizsmall.png
Who I am

@WizarDave
veterans.png
flag-120x76.jpg

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Hey, @wizardave.

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment. The question after the unvotes becomes, who replaces them that's any better? Who has the expertise and will take the time to actually look at the hard fork code, test it all, etc.?

My concern is, even if we could affect that change from our puny SP positions, who would be any better? Who would not kowtow to Steemit Inc, or the whales that put them there? And how long would they last if they did?

Maybe if a decent amount of us decided not to vote for anyone, and made it known why in similar posts, that would get someone's attention? From what I've seen, people like to put their errors and misdeeds behind them, without really, truly getting enough grief or actually doing much suffering of consequences for it.

Maybe there needs to be a tad bit more of that, somehow.

re: one witness to stand up

My understanding of how this works may not be correct, but I believe all that is required is a supermajority, and I've been told that it's 17/21. So, five among the Top 20 plus one would have to not go for the upgrade and that would stop it.

·

We do seem to find ourselves in a conundrum, don't we?

co·nun·drum
kəˈnəndrəm
noun
a confusing and difficult problem or question.

Perhaps the top witnesses should pool a bit of their income and hire a team of at least 1 topnotch programmer.

  • Perhaps, we, all Steemians who care, should all pitch in and hire a team of at least 1 topnotch programmer to look out for our interests.
    • Perhaps, dapp teams should devote some of their programming time looking at the blockchain code and testing proposed hard forks.

Maybe we could get our institutions of higher education involved. As they are teaching and training wannabe programmers, they could look at and teach blockchain technology. This is something I've proposed over the years about various things. They waste time writing junk code that does absolutely nothing, when they could spend time learning and helping open source code. A win-win situation for the students and the open source projects.

  • I am a self-taught programmer. 30 some years ago I took a college programming course. It just so happened that the professor had a death in the family, so a 4th year, soon-to-graduate, student taught for a couple of weeks. She was coming over to look at my code and asking me how it worked. haha So, I ended up making perhaps the bad decision that I should not invest 4 years in learning how to code at a level below where I was already at.

I have read more than one witness say there should be only 1 major change per hardfork. This would allow better testing and code review.

  • At the very least, this one idea should be implemented.

re: 17/21
yes, that does sound correct.

·
·

Well, one major change per hard fork would mean that we still would have had issues with resource credits, regardless, since no one seemed to know going in that it would do what it did. Which to me, seems incredible, that you would let go something on the blockchain that you don't know precisely what it's going to do. Which leads me to believe that they did, but for some reason, such as cover their rears, it made more sense to just feign ignorance.

We probably need a total revamping of high school and college, but that's as likely to happen as anything really that beneficial coming out of them since now their sole purpose seems to be to teach "how not to think or reason." The exact opposite of what their mission should be. If the emphasis were more on technical aspects of doing work or having a career rather than socialization and social indoctrination, than maybe we'd have something.

I'm good with having a hard fork every other three to six months, letting people know less about the technical side of things and more why they want to do it, what happens if it doesn't happen and more of what could happen when they do implement it, so they're not running around 11th hour saying, "They sky might fall. The sky might fall," but without any concrete way to prepare for it.

They, however, have already come up with all the answers for making sure this "never happens again" all the while not really disclosing what all of that might be but making sure it's said in such a way that we're the bad guys if we don't believe that they're doing what they say they're doing, which sounds a lot like what they should have been doing, if they actually are and it actually works, long before this hard fork took place.