RE: Further Clarification on the 'Exclusion List'
Thank you for writing, Mobbs. I'd posted a comment earlier but I couldn't find it anymore. lol So, I'll try to do it again.
If people are opposed to Hive, then I see no problem excluding them from an airdrop - while still giving them all the same access and rights as everyone else.
I think that my problem with the exclusion list is that we've interpreted the single action of voting for 2 or 5 sock witnesses and 25 real witnesses to mean that a person is completely against decentralization. I think people may have voted for those sock accounts for several reasons. For example, some people may not have been comfortable with a blockchain freezing someone's stake. Some people may not have been comfortable with the fact that the decision was taken without the community ever knowing about it beforehand.
As such, I do not think that having a reservation for SF 22.2 directly means you're against decentralization. And I do see a lot of people getting caught in the crossfire, and being condemned because they voted both sides. When you're in the middle like that, it's hard to see whose side you're on. So, who gets to decide whether you're good or evil?
Another thing worth noting is that this exclusion list (just like SF 22.2), isn't directly the decision of the larger community. Until yesterday, no one in the Hive Discord server knew exactly what the list would look like. Hence, it would not be true to say that the community decided to exclude certain community members from the HF. As far as they knew, we're doing this to get away from STINC's stake.
I hope it gets resolved, eventually.
I am sympathetic with this exclusion list because it could have been me. I never supported SF 22.2 because I think it was a hostile move. But it doesn't mean i was against the community. Who knows how many people like myself are there already?
Yep, as I stated above. Trust me I've debated it from that point of view since this whole thing blew up. That's why the marketing is emphasising the DAO appeal system to re-affirm it's all good.
This I can kind of understand. Under the circumstances, some secrecy was needed given the opponent. That being said, I think the main agreement among everyone is that decisions were made too abruptly without enough nuance. But again in their defense, this was a rush job. They were largely not sleeping more than an hour in days to get this out. So there's that to consider.
I think everyone is sympathetic to the list but I think it'll be fine in the long run if the proposal thing works out as it should