RE: Steem Consensus Witness Statement : Hardfork 0.23 (Codename: New Steem)
What we learned from the SoftFork 22.2 and Hive fork from previous Witnesses is that everyone has the right to run various versions of the software they want to run, and the value of the network is created through the participation of more people.
Hive runs the 0.23 version of the software and transferred assets held by 362 accounts to the @ steem.dao account. According to the posting of your boss, blocktrades, every fork sets its own rules, and the value of the tokens is created by voluntarily participating in a chain that people think is more valuable.
- Link 1 : The Fundamental Underpinning of Blockchain Consensus
- Link 2 : The Legal Basis of Cryptocurrency Forks
It's time to stop pointless criticism and war, and now it's time for each individual chain to focus on creating value. The Steem Blockchain will work with more people to create more value in the future. I hope Hive will be a chain that creates value in its own way.
Good luck to STEEM and HIVE.
Currently, there only are about 35 witnesses in the top 500 (not counting Justin Sun's sock puppets) who are running any of your fork versions. 93% of the top 500 witnesses disagree with what you guys are doing.
Yes. Anyone is free to create a new fork with whatever code and data they want.
But there is one key difference here, namely whether or not the owners of the accounts whose states have been altered will themselves have to go through the trouble of first getting the support to run a version with their tokens, and second to have that token listed on exchanges and to thus gain value.
While I was strongly against the Hive exclusions, at least those excluded did not have to do anything to keep their existing STEEM balances. Those who forked to Hive created a new token, and did all the work to get it listed on exchanges and recognized in order to hold value. On the other hand, if those affected by the alterations of balances included in this fork want to run a version with their funds, then granted that this code gets accepted by exchanges, they will have to come up with a different token with a different name and do all the work to give it value.
Thus it is not apples and apples. In one instance, the affected party is imposed with a significant cost in order to retain the value they once had. Wheras in the other instance, those excluded from the HIVE fork has kept everything they had beforehand.
Again, I disagreed with the exclusions, as well as the spam and other attempts to make Steem unstable. But still, this logic does not apply equally.
Has happened before though. Ethereum (ETH) is the fork and Ethereum (ETC) is technically the original chain but it did not inherit the ticker symbol "ETH" nor the listing on exchanges.
Technically, ticker symbols are no-man's land, because they exist only in social consensus and not on the actual blockchain. So it would be up to the exchanges and market data sites to decide which of the forks would get the STEEM ticker.