Keep Your STEEM Powered Up, or Power It Down, Your Choice

in #wintess-category6 years ago (edited)

I didn't think there was any support by witnesses to fork out Steemit's stake. As it turns out, there may have been. There were actual discussions to remove Steemit Inc.'s stake, at least according to some witnesses and what is being said in posts about the issue. I thought this idea/plan was limited to the github fork (by a former contractor I believe he was) where the code was added to take the funds from all Steemit Inc. related accounts on the blockchain. I thought that's all it was, 1 person in some fork no one would ever approve. I was wrong it seems.

After reading the post by @thecryptodrive, I see that there were actual discussions by (many?) people in a private Slack group to "freeze Steemit's accounts" or "cede a portion of their stake", among other things:

Therein discussions were held over various solutions such as forking the existing chain to freeze Steemit's accounts, forking to a new token, entering into discussions with Steemit Inc. to establish a middle ground such as a community trust or governance model where Steemit would cede a portion of their stake into in addition to control of key github repos that should be under community governance or the status quo which nobody wants.

I don't know if this is an accurate representation of what happened, or how many were involved in considering this, or how many supported it. But to think that this was in any way a viable action to take, is disconcerting.

I don't like how many have "ninja mined" stake, but they do. If you're going to remove one account's "ninja mined" stake, then you have to do it to every else who has ninja mined stake. And even if you do that, it spells disaster for the chain where witnesses can essentially rob people of their stake, as long as there is a "consensus" to do it. Again, I don't even know if there were any of the top 19 witnesses who agreed with this idea. I'm just saying.

I agree with some issues brought forth about Steemit Inc., like not communicating well, and having the complete control over the code for the Steem blockchain. I would like that to change, but to suggest taking Steemit Inc.'s stake is folly. If you think the crypto community is reacting negatively to Steem because of how Steemit Inc. has managed it, forking their stake away would spell disaster for the integrity of Steem itself.

As for the power down, Ned and Steemit Inc. can do what they want with it. That's what is preached by so many around here that "people can do what they want with their stake". Why would it be any different for Ned or Steemit Inc.? What, just because they have more of it than anyone else? So what? The amount doesn't change the principle being adhered to that anyone can "do what they want with their stake".

I personally don't agree that "anyone can do what they want", as stake power can be abused, as happens often with flags. I also disapprove of the whole "bidbot" use of stake, as I see it as devaluing for the platform in the short and long-term. The idea that "bidbots will make people buy STEEM to 'promote' their posts, therefore raising the value of STEEM" is false, as we can see. Prices aren't going up because of bidbots. If anything, the value relative to Bitcoin has gotten worse. There are better ways to use stake and better ways to try to get people to buy STEEM. But that's just how I see things.

Steemit Inc.'s power down could mean they are going to sell it (I doubt it, but I can hope for lower prices ;) ), which would be good overall. Even if the crypto community sees this as a bad thing for a company to do, or because it would put downward pressure, so what? Is the value of STEEM the only thing that matters, or the most important thing? No.

If STEEM went down to $0.01 or less because Steemit Inc. would sell all their stake, do you think that spells the end of Steem? Would it never recover? I think it would allow more people to buy STEEM at a cheaper price. At least for those who believed in the blockchain. And sure, ill-intentioned wealthy people could also get in at that time (or now). I wonder if those who advocated for taking Steemit's stake are now preferring Steemit keep it, because it's better in their hands than in the hands of someone who would do worse? That's funny if they are. In the end, "it's your stake and you can do what you want with it", right? LOL.

Some think that the stake will be put into alt account and used to influence the chain more, as opposed to before when it was held in few accounts we knew were owned by Steemit Inc., where everyone knew what was being done with the stake. Well, that could happen. So be it. Maybe the top witnesses should have thought of that and been more adamant about shutting down any possibility of forking out Steemit Inc.'s stake, and none of this would have happened in the first place. I think Ned would have not seen a threat in that case.

If no witnesses supported the confiscation of Steemit Inc.'s stake, then it should have been made more clear at the time, and Ned wouldn't have thought/felt there was a real threat at play. Maybe the discussions that took place can be made public, or at least given to Ned as proof of who was or wasn't for this idea, and he can see that it would never have happened because it would have never been accepted by a consensus-forming majority of the top 19 witnesses.

That would be my suggesting for them going forward. Show Ned there was no threat. And if there was, then who can blame him for doing all he could to safeguard his stake (ninja mined or not), as anyone would if they were under threat of having it stolen.

Either way, the power down is his choice and I don't stand against anyone powering down, or wanting to sell their stake (which I doubt he will do). I welcome it. Bring STEEM to the lowest low possible if that's what is going to happen, then we can move forward knowing we're at the worst position with only one way to go.


Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.


If you appreciate and value the content, please consider: Upvoting, Sharing or Reblogging below.
Follow me for more content to come!


Like what I do? Then consider giving me a vote on the Witness page :) Thanks!

My goal is to share knowledge, truth and moral understanding in order to help change the world for the better. If you appreciate and value what I do, please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page.

Sort:  

Police state? This is sounding very police state. It's their stake, yes we want them to be more open with us but forking out coins is very much censorship.

If the stake is our voice, then forking anyone's stake out to null would be a clear sign were not anti-censorship. This would be clearly going against our chains use case. Making it untrustworthy. Where does this stop, if we allow the stake to be taken from steemit. That means anyone is a target.

Also. anyone who is telling them the power down needs to stop. They need to stop powering down as well. If it's not okay for them to power down it's not okay for anyone. We can't have selective standards if we can't follow them ourselves.

Yeah, its just silly, forkout anyone... lol

If they had went through (or do so before he gets it moved over the next 12 weeks) with stealing his stake, it would be a death blow for trust. No rational person would feel safe putting their money into Steem. They could be next.

I have read several of the top witnesses posts asking him to stop the power down. They can't seriously think he would. Not sure if he is simply moving it to hide or going to sell it, but I imagine he is just as fed up with Steemit as many say repeatedly they are with him. He gets called out a lot, and whether the points are deserved, some of the calling out is vicious. If he decided to cash out and shake this off his feet a wealthy man I could understand. Many here seem to hate him. And for all the hits he takes, it seems to me that it has largely been his ninja stake that has kept the lights on while most have sucked off the Steemit teat to handle their nodes and delegation needs.

No rational person would feel safe putting their money into Steem. They could be next.

I don't fully understand this perception, but I've been reading it a lot.

There's a reason why Ethereum is a lot more valuable than Ethereum Classic, and it's because Ethereum decided to "steal" the stake of the DOA hacker. Consensus trumps immutability. No one on Ethereum is worried that they are next.

Steemits, not a hacker. So it shouldn't be treated the same.

Not the same thing. As was pointed out, Ned isn't a hacker. He didn't steal his stake. If people don't like how he is using it, they should go create their own chain free of him instead of trying to take his away from him. If they can in good conscience take his stake, they could just as easily rationalize taking mine or yours.

Where does one draw the line? @ned makes the claim that the money is being used for development, and the community feels like this development is costing 10 times more than it should. If the community feels like this money is being stolen, then maybe it is. It's all a matter of opinion.

Of course this is all a thought-experiment because the fork is never going to happen. It's very obviously far too contentious to actually happen. In addition, that stake can be used to swap in pro-Steemit witnesses. How many witnesses need to agree on a fork? 17? Yeah, not going to happen.

Ah see well from the perspective of the DAO hacker and ETC, no theft occurred.
The rules of the contract were not broken.

The reason for rewriting the blockchain is irrelevant.
All that matters is if the community has the consensus to do it.

Of course, your points are valid, and we are on the same side. I would not vote to fork @ned's stake away. These arguments obviously make consensus harder to achieve.

At the same time I also respect consensus. I won't be a sore loser if my side doesn't win. Or maybe I will and the chain will fork. Depends on how big both communities are and how worth it the fork would be.

Yeah this chain would have more cred and trust than the new one hehe. The lip and smack talk of many against Ned is hard to see. So much abusive talk.

....where witnesses can essentially rob people of their stake, as long as there is a "consensus" to do it.

Welcome to the world of children in adult's bodies/commies/authoritarians (insert as you see appropriate)

This place is run by 'em...

LOL! The rich around here like to do that. Especially with flags.

Did you see my latest attack?
Yesterday.
A post about tesla - and tribal dancing...yes, seriously.

Interesting learning what goes on behind the scenes.
It is amazing how many times people come up with a winning formula, and then mess with success.

As with many, when I joined, I took it to heart and voted for some witnesses. Then, at the fork, I read of so many of them supporting the flagging vote, even encouraging it, and I realised they want to censor us, so I removed most of my votes.

Since then, I've lost the feeling of needing to help Steemit achieve its potential.

Flagging isn’t censorship. You are confusing curation and flagging opinions.

Everything is still on the chain.

I've had this debate before and I will sstick to my opinion. As for what you said, you are proving then that google, twit and facebook are not censoring anyone - the data is still there, you just have great difficulty in getting to it. Human nature being what it is, then people just go to what they can see.

I've never been against flagging for bad things like child porn or egging on people to kill, for instance. But, whatever your political beliefs, nobody should be allowed to flag.

I've been an ardent fan of Steemit and even I am thinking of moving, despite only having been flagged a couple of times, because the flagger did not like my anti-vaccine posts, but I do not like seeing others being flagged because the flagger has the power to do it.

I shall not be responding to more discussions on this subject - since you insist everything is on the blockchain, go back to see my detailed arguments. Surely it would not be necessary for me to repeat them?

Comparing centralized servers such as Google and Facebook to Steem is nonsensical, at best. If you cannot access to flagged posts on Steem, the issue lies solely on you.

For all flags for beliefs, you need to pay a visit to @freezepeach.

I'm 100% for flagging plagiarism and spam.

Plagiarism! Really!?

Half the flags I have seen for plagiarism, was despite the material coming from the blog of the same person - and though he states it is so, he is ignored.

Enforcer, I do not wish to discuss this with you anymore, as you obviously do not treasure free speech, so please go your way and leave me to mine - as I do not respect people who have your beliefs and we will only end up insulting each other.

Half the flags I have seen for plagiarism, was despite the material coming from the blog of the same person - and though he states it is so, he is ignored.

I check those. Most of the times, THEY ARE NOT. You must be very selective in what you choose to read.

I no longer want to discuss it with someone who overdoes his "muh decentralization".

You don't know what free speech means.

Since my polite request was ignored - you are MUTED

Lol

You are too weak, and easily agitated. Nothing you said was polite. Please stop the delusion.

Oh wait, never mind. It's someone who thinks they are morally "superior".

Flagging does suck, as it gets abused by the powerful here.

You know where the actual outrage needs to be directed? The FEDERAL RESERVE. Imagine if we couldn't control any inflation and STINC controlled all of it. That is the system we are living under RIGHT NOW. We've accepted a system 1000 times worse than this one we are complaining about right here.

It honestly doesn't matter what STINC does because they only control 90% of the inflation created by their stake. In fact, we all enjoy this same ability. We all get to control 90% of the inflation created by our stake. The thing that annoys me the most is no one seems to be thankful for this... they just seem to assume it's a given.

Coins can only be spent once. The double spend problem has been solved. The world will never be the same. Rejoice.

Yeah, there are bigger problems, but the problems that are smaller in other places still matter ;) It would be good if the world would wake up to the banking scam ;)

I guess we would have never had any of the wonderful and not so wonderful things we have here if it wasn’t for Steemit Inc, @ned and @dantheman. With the huge amount of liquid Steem being released from their power down even if they decide to cash it in. It will just mean the economy can grow even more. If that means a lower price for STEEM: $£€₩¥₽ fiat well then so be it. In the long term I feel it’ll be a positive. The number of real working dApps being developed for the STEEM blockchain is amazing.

Yup. None of this would exist without the great Dan Larimer.

Surely a more relevant question would be, who is buying? Is it by a number of investors, or just one or a handful, looking to take control?

EDIT:

@krnel - I just looked and saw that I had, at some time in the past, voted for you, so, sorry, can't do it again.

I'm just glad that this post of yours led me to coming to know a bit more of how you think, so that I feel good about having backed you.

STINC should be happy they are not on the EOS chain, where a fork isn't even nessasary for that kind of shit. Witness corruption is the 51% attack of DPOS. 😎

LOL, that sucks. Corrupt some people and you corrupt chain.

Yeah, it seems like watching history in the making as DPOS evolves a governance like water seeking its own level. Not sure if you have seen Luke Stokes' recent post suggesting a SteemDAC. A link is included below for your reading pleasure.

https://steemit.com/steemdac/@lukestokes/steemdac-a-plan-we-can-start-today-to-decentralize-steem-governance

Yeah I saw. Any governance by people is only as good as the people and the laws they make. Society shows how twisted and corrupted things can get... :/ The real way is everyone being moral agents, not depending on a few to make everything work for everyone. But that requires learning and philosophical understanding which most are loathsome to undertake. People think buying votes that takes 1/3 of the reward pool from others who don't pay to play is "right"... lol. Earning your way, fuck that, just buy your way... great "social media" platform and "community evaluation" of content... not.

... great "social media" platform and "community evaluation" of content... not.

My outside understanding of EOS (have not read entire constitutio(s) as of yet if ever) is that it was a pendulum swing from the STEEM experiment and went too far in my opinion. Freezing or reversing transactions should require a fork not a human committee in my opinion. Really spending some time trying.to understand his proposal, though.

While I cannot say I have been the biggest fan of Steemit Inc, my experiences with private companies is that the leader first need to secure and provide performance to their shareholders. What Ned did is probably also part of his fiduciary responsibility and job requirement to protect the asset of the Corporation.

Posted using Partiko iOS

Protecting your assets is legit ;)

There's so much hipocrisy going on in this place it's not even funny.

Well, I was hoping for lower prices, too. Oh well, I already bought a lot anyway. If this was the bottom, I have a quite comfortable position already.

Of course I wouldn't mind buying some more at 10 cents or so. 😂

Good move ;) I didn't buy any lol

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.15
JST 0.029
BTC 63396.80
ETH 2615.51
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.86