You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A fundamental change to my witness voting behavior
Heh, then you are completely out of touch, or part of the problem, and given this exchange, its becoming more and more clear which.
Heh, then you are completely out of touch, or part of the problem, and given this exchange, its becoming more and more clear which.
Given the exchange you knew before ;)
Well. Conspiracy theorist confirmed! Have fun with the tinfoil hat :D
Hah, I knew you would resort to your only potential response, which was NOT to prove me wrong, but label me in a way that people who cannot actually defend their positions resorts to. EVERY.SINGLE.TIME.
Lame, you aren't impressing me at all with your ability to prove me wrong, since I brought data and like a dozen source links already in the other thread. And you've brought what, poor me, I cant beat jerry so ill whine about it, and make a marketing move and whine about my expensive RPCs because robbing users on a dice game is SO EXPENSIVE these days.
Chump.
The issue with conspiracy theorists is that they try to connect dots to prove their predetermined facts, where there's just no connection.
How did you get the impression the RPC and the dice would be related in any way? Yes, the dice uses the node. But it's not what causes the main load. And I wouldn't have brought up the topic of the node if you wouldn't have told me how it's the right thing to pay for everything yourself...
Now about your "data" (although I'm really just rephrasing luke again):
The graphics you presented showed that some big stakeholders decide about the top of the witness list. Great news, you nearly figured out dPoS!
Distribution is an issue I think about (and try to work on, with the little means I got) since two years. You don't have a solution either, because it's just how the system works. These guys are anonymous, and as luke said, nobody knows their reasoning for their votes. Are you jealous about not having their vote? What'd you do if you got it?
I call you a conspiracy theorist, because that's exactly what you're doing. You avoid most of the questions, constantly throw new issues into the discussion, and there is no argument that can convince you there's no conspiracy, only proofs that the arguing party is part of the problem.