You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Urgent Community Petition: Steemit Inc. to Stop 34 Mil SP Powerdown!
I find this movement to be more worrisome than the power-down. Ned had an opportunity to realize that he was overreacting to something that wasn't especially important, and failed. That's a problem. But now all the top witnesses have the same opportunity, and are failing again, and once again escalating a situation that nobody ever needed to care about.
The complete success of Nordberg's troll of the whole Steem ecosystem, in which you are all collaborating, is ridiculous.
I guess I don't see how @ned / Steemit, Inc is overreacting when @thecryptodrive here is openly acknowledging that "60+ stakeholders, witnesses and dapp owners decided to move to a private chat {...} Therein discussions were held over various solutions such as forking the existing chain to freeze Steemit's accounts...." (my emphasis added but other than that, straight from the horse's mouth). We aren't talking about @ned / Steemit, Inc starting a powerdown solely in reaction to the github pull request. Actual top witnesses actually talked about doing this! And are actually admitting it in one breath while asking for the powerdown to stop in the next breath!
It was an overreaction because the technological ability to do that wasn't in the PR. If the witnesses wanted to decide that as a solution I suppose they could have, but 60+ people somehow getting a hardfork written, tested, and implemented without anyone ever telling Ned about it is a pipe dream.
The idea that they might have intentionally implemented an untested hardfork for any purpose is itself scarier than anything Ned has done.
Only one person issued the code and discussion ensued after that, the power down fuelled discussions even further.
Presumably that discussion did not include "let's implement untested code that is at best 5% finished." Someone would have had to do those things before a fork became remotely practical.
A fork is not anywhere near decided on and is just an idea being thrown around and voiced more so by some than others.
No one suggested that it was. You don't seem to be following the topic of this subthread.
It did not.
100%, you're right on here. It was I got fired butthurt, the employee that yells some stuff as they're being escorted out by security.
The more important thing here is how the discontented saw the viability of the moment.
Ned actually left the slightly more open format discussion Slack he created which had somewhere between 100 and 150 members, of which I was one for about 6 months, if memory serves me. So just for the record he started to withdraw.
How are top witness failing again?
Well, downvoting honest discussion is a good example.
not a top witness
Well at least there's something to be glad about.
"Sorry, I was mistaken" works well too