You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Did We Learn Any Lessons From HF20?
There was, and is, a lot of heated debate with regards to HF20 and its readiness for prime time. The top 20, and those of us just under, are not in lock-step with Steemit, Inc. While we try to work with them disagreements will happen and often do. As a witness I sincerely apologize to the entire Steemit community for the disruption in service.
Thanks for the insight on your remarks about this hard fork. I appreciate that you tried to do what was right.
I am by no means stating that everyone is in lock-step. I am simply stating that there is a lot of pressure to be on board with Steemit, Inc.'s plans for the blockchain - and it's not just from them. It's pretty hard to deny the culture that I mentioned in the post when it's something that has been observed by many longstanding members of the community and new members alike. Those who push back against these pressures and this culture are risking a lot, as I'm sure you've noticed over the past 2+ years.
Even with that pressure and the culture here, I can't imagine why any top witness would want to push this fork through, knowing that it was an extremely ambitious hard fork and knowing that there was limited testing...and knowing that there were in fact problems with negative RC balances. And specifically in light of last week's halt to the chain due to one line of code that contained an error, I have a hard time believing that there wasn't more doubt among witnesses that this fork was going to be implemented smoothly.
Under such conditions, with access to that kind of information, it's mind-blowing to me that all of our top-20 witnesses updated to the new version anyway. I can only conclude that they...
And/Or
Any one of these three is a major concern for this blockchain and its users/investors. As a whole, the "most trusted" people in charge of Steem blockchain oversight and functionality were completely derelict in their duties. I think this is a huge signal to users and investors that there can be little actual trust in such a "trustless" network. And I think it also speaks volumes about the level of centralization that actually exists rather than the theoretical decentralization that everyone seemingly pretends we have.
Anyway - thanks for taking a stand against what many people believe was a failure of implementation, regardless of whether or not they were for or against the changes. I had already stated prior to the fork that I would like to try the RC system, but I was cautious/concerned about the scope of the fork and the implementation of it. I think my concern and the concerns from people like you and @drakos have been validated. I will continue to oppose these massive protocol change packages for as long as they continue to be proposed.
Frankly, I had such high hopes for Steemit. However, so far I am disappointed.
Hard truth is that all witnesses need to stand up to these bullies and do the right thing. Maybe next time your preached down to have some balls to pull off your own fork and go your own way. Because if ned and steemit blog can 11th hour everybody off a bridge than you better not accept the next glass of kool-aid. Does anyone even know who these people are? Look at EOS.
Steemit is awesome. All is Forgiven.
Posted using Partiko iOS
As well you know, there should not have been a hardfork with supermajority support if there is still heated debate. Again, as well every top 20 witness knows, the moment all top 20 witnesses start producing with a 20.x node, it means they support HF20, not that they are still debating it. That HF20 is still being debated after they elected to run a 20.x node and the chain forked is beyond me.