You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Vlog 459: A sad day for Steem

in #exyle5 years ago

Some feared he would start voting for witnesses with the stake. So witnesses are doing that softfork 222 in order to protect their positions in the top 20.

I am not in the top 20 and I may be suffering even more from having made this decision. My very first reaction was, like @exyle, "no way to freeze account assets!"

Then I have read the concern of everybody, agreeing or disagreeing, and would have it been a matter of position in the witness ranking, I would have NOT supported it.

The main goal has always been to avoid one single entity throwing out all top 30 witnesses to (brute) force the adoption of a non-Steem community agreed switch to TRON.

Sort:  

The main goal has always been to avoid one single entity throwing out all top 30 witnesses ...

Why not just reduce the number of witnesses one single account can vote for?
Five to (at maximum) ten witness votes per account would be enough!
At least it would make it somewhat harder for one entity to control the whole blockchain. I know it would still be possible to use multiple accounts for witness voting, but in that case the stake had to be spread on different account which resulted in less voting power.

Already now the influence of - for example - @freedom on witness voting is far too big.

Why not just reduce the number of witnesses one single account can vote for?

While this is something I would like to see, it is a major change in governance that should be discussed (and it has already been at length) and will require a hard fork.

 5 years ago Reveal Comment