You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: An explanation of my decision to move away from the platform
I would wait one more fork. They promised to change attitude... In fact the last HF is a decent sign that something changed... They respected the opinion of the majority of top witnesses. They have also said that they will give priority to implement a more linear reward curve. Also @sneak will introduce us soon a new method (tool) that will make our life easier to reach consensus(or not)... We will soon witness if it is all "empty words" or it reflects... reality
PS I guess you are aware of the new marketing efforts from @andarchy and his new role to our ecosystem(?) ...
Part of the issue that I didn't explain for me is that it's a distraction (quite unprofitable) from the real focus of my life, of realising dreams of building a secure, peer to peer, failure resistant, resilient protocol for all the things that Steem and other similar efforts are a single provider of with a corporate chain.
I wish the marketing guys the best of luck because the crypto world is full of scuttlebutt that's mostly not just rumours.
As for the promises, they mean nothing, and Dan said clearly in that post I linked in the OP, the are not supposed to be part of what they do anyway. Well, the other issue for me is they threw together a monolithic chain that will be a nightmare to apply the principle of 'separation of concerns', which really means a rewrite from the ground up. So instead of sitting idly by while the vested interests fight against change, diverting development energy away from this, which I consider to be the most important thing - because without this the system is a nightmare of spaghetti-like interdependencies - I am going to focus my energy on doing what I think should have been started at least 5 months ago.
See, I read a pretty strong subtext of dissatisfaction in your comment as well, all those elipsises...
My biggest issue of all is that it's not an open platform. I can't fork it, play with a small test user base, to see the effect, so we are completely dependent on them, and don't you think there is something of a contradiction between the exclusivity in the licence, the corporate registration and that centralisation, and the claimed goals of building a fabric?
They box themselves into a corner with these constraints, and nobody is free to volunteer to help them out, and people who do are shunned or even banned from the Git repository (like they did to @faddat, who by the way was just attempting to improve documentation).
No, we need to start again with the lessons learned, and most importantly, completely open development, no corporate governance, and a focus on the most important thing of all: adoption of the base currency. This last one was messed up from the beginning, with the absurd inflation rate, and 9.5% is still too high, and as I have been banging on for so long: The token matters most. Not the SBD, not the forum. It is impossible to get growth in the value of the currency without taking care of these most fundamental things. Userbase needs a bigger pool to make rewards, there is a definite ratio between the price and the number of users.
You too? Thanks for making a point :) That was for the post
But it applies here too, anyways thank you for being here, you were one of the only 5(6) people I have voted as witnesses, because I saw honesty and dedication in you, pushing the envelope and going step by step doing what you thought best, I don't know you but you gave that air of real care so you got my admiration, you are on par with krnel dragosroua liondani furion and bitcoiner :)
Wherever the wind blows you :) Cheers Good Luck and Thanks for all the fish :)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think it is fair to give them a chance to correct what is wrong. I'm with you on that.
They need to sort out the Steemit Steem account, transparently! You can't say Steem is for everyone with Steemit having control over that much Steem. They always said they would sort it out and I believe it was right to have a super whale at the start....but now, it's an offensive risk to further development of the Steem ecosystem. Developers like lok1 shouldn't need to feel they have to go elsewhere to build.
Transparency, developers and development of an ecosystem. If they are serious, I'd like to see them get on with it with some very rapid progress to something of considerable substance.
If not....despite how much it would pain me, I'll be off too.
I'm sceptical. The steemitblog post about the rewards falling contains
a liean inaccuracy, and the marketing announcement video contained almost no information, and I wasn't able to detect any marketing in the sense that I was taught.Also, it will be hard to market our way out of this.
Oh well, let's hope for the best.
I was very disappointed regarding the marketing post. It was not very professional.
"Not fit for a press release without some changes", as one of my collegues who works in marketing put it. He likes understatements, probably because he is British 8-).
Yeah, he was kind.
My last boss was a Brit and a lawyer, he said sorry as he screwed you over...omg, loved his humor hahaha
I'm staying no matter what happens, I'll be a content creator and try and be helpful and positive. However, when I see a system that skims the cream off the top of content creators work I'm going to speak up...right now the system is geared towards big investors who actually need content creatures to secure their investments, through their protective controlling behavior, investors are chasing away their investment and profit generators.
I don't think there are that many big investors who actually put really money up. There are just a few of us. I think that the problem is that the initial "investors" actually got huge, huge amounts of the currency for almost nothing......... There really is no actually skin in the game of many of these whales. Even at these low prices that continue to sit on huge profits. That's why many of their actions are not aligned with the success of the platform. It is really hard for them to lose in this venture, not matter what they do. Too much of the platform was given away for way way too cheap early on.