[공지]Four-Party Dialogue Proposal (Steem foundation, Tron foundation, Steem witnesses, and Korean community)
- 트론 재단의 steemit inc 인수 후 스팀 블록체인 커뮤니티는 구 증인과 스팀잇 간의 갈등, 핵심 개발진 이탈, 커뮤니티 분열 등으로 인해 극심한 혼란을 겪고 있습니다.
We are under huge conflicts among all different parties on Steem community since Tron Foundation has acquired Steemit inc. This situation is getting serious between the previous witnesses who proceeded 0.22.2 fork versus Tron (Justin Sun), which makes our community is split apart and core devs left from Steem blockchain.
- @proxy.token과 스팀 코인판에서는 스팀 블록체인 커뮤니티 정상화와 스팀 생태계 발전 방향을 논의하기 위해 스팀 코인판 디스코드 채널을 통해 다양한 커뮤니티 사용자들의 의견을 청취할 수 있는 시간을 가졌습니다.
We (@proxy.token and Steemcoinpan) hosted a discussion session via our SCT Discord Group in order to settle down these conflicts and discuss the directions that will improve Steem ecosystem. It was a great opportunity to listen to all different sides of opinion.
- 일련의 대화를 통해 한국 커뮤니티에서는 현재 스팀 커뮤니티에서 발생하고 있는 상황에 대한 한국 커뮤니티의 의견을 전달했고, 기존 스팀 증인과 저스틴 선 등 각 이해 관계자들의 입장 차이를 다시 한 번 확인할 수 있었습니다.
With a series of discussions, we have delivered the overall opinion from the Korean community about this situation. Again, we also found out that there was a definite difference in opinion and interest between the previous witnesses and Justin Sun.
- 또한, 평행선을 이루며 지금처럼 서로를 탓한다면, 상호 간의 시너지는 물거품이 되고, 스팀 블록체인 생태계는 결국 퇴보할 수 밖에 없다는 점도 충분히 확인할 수 있었던 시간이었습니다.
We are highly afraid that the Steem blockchain ecosystem would be broken and never be possible to have synergy between different parties since they keep attacking each other without any consensus.
- 의사 진행 방식과 관련해서는, 누구나 대화에 참여할 수 있는 방식으로 진행하려 했으나 구체적인 계획을 논의하고 특정 주제에 대한 깊이있는 토론에는 적합하지 않은 방식으로 확인되어 다음과 같이 개선할 예정입니다.
We'd like to host one more discussion session via our Discord group, but at this time we want to change the session into a panel discussion so that it can be a productive conversation as below:
(1) 발언권자 제한: 회의 진행자 1인(@jayplayco), 스팀 재단 관계자 1인(미정), 트론 재단(저스틴 선), 스팀 증인 대표 1인(미정), 한국 커뮤니티 대표 1인(미정)
(2) 토의 내용은 누구나 확인할 수 있음.
(1) A total of 5 people only can speak (type comments) - @jayplayco (the host), 1 representative person from Steem Foundation (TBD), Justin Sun (representing Tron Foundation), 1 representative person from the previous witnesses (TBD), 1 representative person from the Korean community (TBD)
(2) Anyone can see the conversation via joining our Discord group.
토론 일정 및 세부 내용이 정리되는 대로 추가 토론 세션을 다시 공지하겠습니다.
We will announce the schedule the upcoming discussion session when all the details are confirmed.참고로, @proxy.token 측에서 스팀 재단에 요청한 스팀 발전 계획(로드맵)은 금일 공개되었습니다.(https://steempeak.com/steem/@steemalliance/steem-foundation-proposed-roadmap)
We noticed that Steem Foundation has announced its proposal (roadmap) today, which was what we (@proxy.token) requested for them.
기타(Additional)
- 발언권을 가진 스팀 재단, 트론 재단, 스팀 증인, 한국 커뮤니티에서는 대화에서 다룰 주제와 대표자를 스팀잇 포스팅을 통해 알려주시길 바랍니다. (댓글로 포스팅 주소를 남겨주시면 고맙겠습니다)
Please let us know the representative person from each party (Steem Foundation, Tron foundation, Steem witnesses, and Korean community) who will join the panel discussion. Please make a Steemit post that addresses the selected person to represent and topic items that you want to discuss, and comment the post URL here.
So far, to me it seems like Justin has been lying and giving false promises. None of what he is saying is really matching his actions. I hope you won’t be tricked by false promises. I also hope I am wrong, and he actually delivers on all great talks. Good luck.
Whoever becomes the representative, please be sure to compile and curate a bunch of user questions, rather than witness-only questions. Though you technically represent the community, there is always more nuance among the people.
Assuming the debate will get heated and conflicting, I'd suggest a designated time period for quickfire round questions previously collated, so we can get the best of both worlds; user concerns, and technical debate.
Rather than having two people of the Korean community (Host and 1 Member) I believe there should be two witnesses of the previous top 20.
Those witnesses represent the entire community and not just a part of it since they were voted by most of the votes and stake.
Else, we would have to take a representative of the German, Brazilian, Spanish, etc communities too and I don't think that is fair.
I partly agree, but in the end only a few very big accounts (from which @freedom is completely unknown) decide which witnesses are on top.
Now, in respect of his available STEEM power, @justinsunsteemit is the 'new @freedom' and teaches us that there should be means (implemented into the code) to restrict the influence of single individuals, if we want STEEM to be decentralized.
I think that at least we should reduce the number of witness votes per account to lessen somewhat the huge influence of the biggest stake holders.
4 votes per account will solve these issues.
For example ...
4 votes instead of 30.
Yes, yes, I know what you wanted to say. I just think that four votes is one option among others.
Thank you SCT for taking the initiative in these difficult times. The biggest issue that is repeatedly brought up time and time again, is the power down period. I agree that it should be reduced from the 13 weeks into something more manageable. On this point, everyone will have to make a compromise, but we will get there.
Speaking for myself, I refuse to entertain the notion that certain accounts obtain special power down rights. Furthermore, he has not declared formally which accounts are to be included and I get the feeling it will include his. Regardless, the power-down option is a right granted to ALL of us, written in our own code law, law that is decided by a consensus of yours, mine and our community.
I ask the Steem Foundation, who I nominate @aggroed to attend on behalf of the Steem Foundation, to set up a community vote on what the power-down time should be. For example 1, 2, 3 or 4 weeks. That we vote through the comments sections (one person, one vote) as we will be able to weed out bot accounts and newly created ones. On this decision, I don't think stake based voting will be the most efficient. The proposed power-down time with most voted gets enacted by the consensus witnesses and the HF is prepared as such. The witnesses represent us and therefore should honour this vote.
Please be careful of Mr Sun's words, as I am sure you are noticing are becoming conflicting, less truthful and honourable. In my view actions speak louder than words. His actions definitely prove that. Any promises he makes must be released via press release to the international media. Not one, where he will think he can delete on the Steem blockchain or Twitter. It is obvious he values his 'face' value tremendously and making him promise this way will pin himself to it, this for the whole world to see.
I wish you all the best in the negotiations and thank you,
@intrepidsurfer
Hi @intrepidsurfer
I am the current chair of the Foundation. @aggroed is the vice -chair and is also a consensus witness. As such, it is best he not represent the Foundation at the meeting. With the discussion anticipated to included discussion about power down lengths, member of the board @guiltyparties will attend on behalf of the Foundation. Should he not be present I will be the backup.
At this time it would not be appropriate for us to set a community poll up in regards to power down time. Once the situation warrants it, should the consensus Witnesses find it would be helpful for us to make that happen, we certain could do so.
ShadowsPub
The devs didn't leave because of the Soft Forl 0.22.2 just so thats clear :)
they left because tron is attempting to centralize steem. the community witnesses are trying to keep steem owned by everyone. justin managed to convince exchanges, including the korean huobi, to use the money of people on exchanges to powerup and vote for justins own witnesses.
So we need the korean community to remove all money sitting on exchanges, and use all of their 30 witness votes for witnesses not running 22.5. under the hood everyone is running now 22.1 but the witnesses running 22.5 are justins witnesses and justin is planning to give more power to exchanges by giving them special rights for powering down quickly which will increase their ability to use peoples money for voting, and the ability to quickly buy or sell steem increasing the volatility of steem.
Yes
Here are some questions I'd like to see asked,
What changes will be made to avoid future coups?
How will we fund development without Stinc's funds?
How will we prevent another user's property from being frozen by the few in the future?
What's the most fair powerdown period for the user's and economy alike?
Should weighted stake voting continue for governance?
How do we decentralize Steem?
Question for everyone participating
Do you believe that steeminc stake is supposed to be used for development of the blockchain or for steeminc shareholders profit?
Second one do you believe that steeminc stake should be able to vote ?
i see on your page are only korean posts with the sct tag,
how aware are people on your site about the situation?
It seems to me that neither side is budging at the moment. Some concessions might have to be made if we want to work together. Is a change to a powerdown of 4 weeks (been discussed as an option for the past couple of months) something that would appease Sun a bit? And then there's the question of STINCs ninja mine and the loose agreement that it would be used for community development. Where do we (the steem community) stand on that? Do we want 100% of it and fuck Sun, or could we negotiate a smaller amount (25%?) committed for some time (1 to 2 years?) to encourage Sun to stick around and grow the value of the community so he makes a profit over 25%? This could see SMTs developed and perhaps other ideas that are floating around out there. Would Sun make a concession like this, particularly if we make a concession of 4 weeks on powerdown?