RE: Steem Consensus Witness Statement: Code Updated

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Steem Consensus Witness Statement: Code Updated

View the full context

davemccoy in #steem • 5 years ago (edited)

I am nobody. Small fish, no importance. But I don't like this. I understand the witnesses/big money are afraid of losing their power, but changing the rules and locking a guy out seems to me to be wrong.

He bought his SP just like everyone else did, and now he is excluded because you're afraid of how he might vote it. Its bad karma.

"First they came for your neighbor, then they come for you".

Like I said, I'm nothing. But frankly, I'm even more disgusted with Steemit by the way people are acting on this issue. I will never forget this lesson and I'm sure it will taint the chain forever (or as long as it lasts).

5 years ago in #steem by davemccoy

0.00 BPC

8 votes

Sort:

Trending

[-]

smooth 5 years ago

He bought his SP just like everyone else did

Really? Who else bought a massive, consensus-breaking block of ninja-mined stake from Steemit Inc?

No one.

0.00 BPC

1 vote

[-]

davemccoy 5 years ago

Did he not pay for the Steem Power that he purchased? The witnesses let Ned sell the so-called Steem onto the market and never locked it up like in a "soft-fork", so I think its the same Steem that everyone else has.

And regarding the "consensus-breaking block" its irrelevant... are you trying to say that people can buy Steem but not too much so that the witnesses keep their control? Bad message.

And regarding ninja-mined stake, aren't all the witnesses aware of many "ninja-mined" stakes that are out there? Why have they not been blocked before, is it because the witnesses benefited from the delegations from the ninja mined stakes? Why aren't you blocking other ninja-mined stakes right now?

It is totally a farce what you guys are doing, its visible to many and mark my words... It will backfire on the witnesses. While I don't have the power, and most people on the Steem blockchain don't have the power to stop you; you will find out soon enough what the legal system is like.

I have nothing against you all personally, in fact about 5 of the witnesses are my friends, but it won't stop the fact that this is a blunder that will not only cost you all personally, but will bring down the whole integrity of the Steem blockchain.

Sadly you can't defend it, you can try, but we both know you are twisting the facts the make you feel like you chose properly. Its called cognitive dissonance. But when you mess with multi-million dollar players its not the same as squashing a minnow into submission.

0.00 BPC

[-]

jaguar.force 5 years ago (edited)

If you were informed, you would know smooth is no longer a witness.
In so far as the rest of your devil's advocate diatribe:
that was then, and this is now, better late than never.

0.00 BPC

1 vote

[-]

davemccoy 5 years ago

lol... devil diatribe? hahahaha

0.00 BPC

[-]

davemccoy 5 years ago

Thanks for fixing that @jaguar.force! I was hoping you didn't really think I was the devil :) ... Have a good day and I appreciate the engagement even if we disagree!!!

0.00 BPC

[-]

smooth 5 years ago (edited)

Did he not pay for the Steem Power that he purchased?

I have no idea the terms of any deal which may have happened between Justin, Ned, and Steemit. The rumor is that Justin bought Steemit, the company, and not the stake directly, so I fail to see how a change in the shareholder list would make any difference. The company is not the blockchain and the blockchain is not the company.

Apart from that, as many others have said, a change of ownership even of the stake doesn't change anything. Could Justin sell everything back to Ned, and Ned would then be off the hook for any statements that he ever made pre-sale ("That was Old Ned, I'm New Ned, please don't try to hold me accountable for anything that Old Ned said"). This is absurd in my view.

And regarding the "consensus-breaking block" its irrelevant... are you trying to say that people can buy Steem but not too much so that the witnesses keep their control? Bad message

That is hypothetial. It is much more difficult to buy a controlling stake on the open market. That is one of the premises behind any proof-of-stake system: that buying up enough stake to break consensus is extremely expensive and unlikely. If that turns out to be false we will have to face the fact that proof-of-stake (including DPoS) is a lot weaker than we thought and may not be able to be trusted. But again, that is hypothetical. Buying up a huge block of ninja-mined/premined/etc. stake that was described as non-voting is not hypothetical.

aren't all the witnesses aware of many "ninja-mined" stakes that are out there?

I'm not aware of anyone other than Steemit who manipulated the mining to guarantee the outcome they wanted (effectively an 80% premine) by withholding information, posting broken mining instructions, resetting the chain when it didn't go their way, making public statements about how the ninja-mined stake was not going to vote on witnesses and earmarked to develop the ecosystem, etc. No one else did that. Steemit did. The situation is unique, and you can't wash away that history by selling a company.

Also, I'm not a witness, just a stakeholder like you, and I am voting to support the witnesses who are running the update. Your logic in trying to convince me to change my mind is seriously wanting, but you are free to vote your way and the votes will decide it. I'm not even sure what is the point of all this noise when we have voting. Don't like what the witnesses are doing? Vote them out!

0.00 BPC

[-]

davemccoy 5 years ago

ok... thanks for the discussion, I have nothing again you and wish you well!

0.00 BPC

[-]

smooth 5 years ago

Wish you well too.

0.00 BPC

1 vote

[-]

guiltyparties 5 years ago

This isn't about losing power or money. This is about mitigating the high possibility that the entire chain would be shut down. When Steemit Inc sold their company and stake the messages that were received from Tron and are still received (look at their Medium article) is that the intent was for the Steem blockchain to be cannibalized, STEEM swapped, and all the dapps that people built on Steem to be moved to Tron. Tron decided to make this decision for independent companies and dapps, on their behalf. That's why this had to happen.

0.00 BPC

[-]

davemccoy 5 years ago (edited)

For whatever noble reason you may think (or imagine), it doesn't justify "THEFT".

The bottom line is Justin Sun PAID money to buy SP like everyone else. There were no conditions EVER placed on that steem in any formal manner (a blog post or promise doesn't count as restricting that Steem). It is not Justin Sun's issue, if that SP from Ned was not valid, then the restrictions should have been in place long before now.
Many (if not all) of the witnesses were well aware that the SP existed and chose not to do anything about it at any time for YEARS (until it was sold to someone that they felt threatened by). That puts the witnesses into a situation where they have NOT been "duped" by Justin Sun and in fact, they have now opened themselves up personally to being sued for:

a) possible collusion (20 witnesses had secret meeting with possible backers to "take this guy's stake"???), b) possible extortion (put your money in limbo land unless you do what pleases me???), and
c) outright theft (taking something that belongs to someone else and doesn't belong to you).

They better be prepared to spend $100k or more to defend themselves, because its a no brainer this guy will sue them too if they don't remove this.

3 This group of witnesses just created a situation where Steem is pretty close to guaranteed to go away now. Because a) they will lose this battle in court b) they have taken actions that are major deterrents to investment in Steem by real money and c) they have destroyed the myth that this is a "decentralized" exchange (and that will be a hard one to ever shake again).

I'm not saying this because I care about Justin Sun, I'm saying this because I have been through many things like this before. I've seen how it will play out and it is a very stupid decision. They may think (and have some people convinced) their actions are noble too. But that will never justify taking someone's private property because you are worried about what he may do with his intentions.

What's the solution you might ask? If they were really concerned about Sun taking over and doing something unsavory, they should've bought more Steem. That's what a real decentralized platform would've forced as a solution.

ps... don't think for a second this is something that "had to happen". That's absurd.

0.00 BPC

[-]

guiltyparties 5 years ago

Actually, there were conditions. There were very specific conditions of what that specific piece of stake was to be used for. If there weren't that'd be an entire different ballgame. 2. You are absolutely right on this, excellently put. Except for the part where witnesses would be sued because as you know, if you sell a piece of property and fail to disclose that property had condition, the seller is the one going to court.

a) No. Did not happen. b) No, mitigation until a solution is obtained. c) Not what the code does.

No, the situation was prevented. a) Witnesses aren't the one who sold a product under false pretenses. b) Preventing the destruction of dapps and investment like yours is encouraging for investors. c) This is exactly how decentralization works; preventing one person from shutting down a public OS blockchain.

Think for what would happen to all of the Steem ecosystem, users, dapps and communities if they suddenly have no blockchain to exist on and are mandated to move to someone else's corporate controlled blockchain.

Yes, buying STEEM is definitely a good idea.

0.00 BPC

2 votes

[-]

davemccoy 5 years ago

I appreciate the effort and never have a problem with someone sticking up for what they believe!

My respect to you :)

0.00 BPC

[-]

guiltyparties 5 years ago

Thank you and likewise.

0.00 BPC

1 vote