RE: Steem Governance is Multiparty
Because we don't know if @pumpkin / @freedom is owned by Steemit, there was considerable pressure for witnesses to go along with Steemit Inc and this hardfork.
This has been the case for many HF now. The majority of the top witness would drop out of top 20 if they were to lose @pumpkin's vote. @pumpkin's influence goes beyond the top 20 witnesses.
@blocktrades also has a substantial influence on the witness ranking. He only votes for 5 witnesses at the moment. @blocktrades' proximity to Steemit Inc also creates pressure for top witnesses to get in line with Steemit Inc.
These pressures, although not ultimate factors, have created with this HF and in the past, situations where there are high risks to go against Steemit Inc's HF (and potentially lose @pumpkin or @blocktrades' vote) with very low possibility of reward, (delaying, stopping an hardfork while proving it was justified).
This is one aspect of Steem which would benefit from more public exposure.
This is quite clear FUD and an example better positioned in an argument against DPoS on a theoretical basis.
Because the facts are clear: Freedom is not owned by Steemit Inc nor it’s employees. It’s someone or some people in the ecosystem. This person has a right to vote with their stake. Blocktrades is the same.
Beyond that, Top 20 Witnesses were expressly requested to Not Upgrade by Steemit Inc if the code did not meet their standards.
If the witness’ Standards aren’t high enough — that is on the Stakeholders, such as You, of the ecosystem to demand change in.
These are unsubstantiated facts. If you have proofs of who @freedom is, then feel free to reveal them publicly. As of now, it remains unknown who @freedom is and thus my points remain valid.
A lack of evidence disproving your claim doesnt make it evidence that your claim is accurate.
I could hardly believe he tried to use that one and essentially try to tell me I am lying. I know what he's trying to get at -- something about DPoS really -- or making demands on others in a system he opted into -- but I don't think he has articulated it to himself yet.
You could be lying. This isn't out of the realm of what is possible. Acting as we know something we actually ignore is foolish.
Is there a mouse in your pocket?
No.
Then note your “we” does not include me. Assuming despite refutation that I don’t know freedom is no one in this company is asinine. Beyond that there’s plenty of argument for DPoS that it doesn’t matter who Freedom or Blocktrades are. All the parties youve been complaining about are Stakeholders. DPoS is held together by Stakeholders’ Incentives and Pareto Principle despite Tragedy of the Commons. Understand that first.
It’s as unsubstantiated as you not owning @freedom and you not being Satoshi. You can’t disprove a fact that doesn’t exist.
Your point is invalid in relation to DPoS. And it’s alarmingly lame by in a backwards way accusing me of lying.
Come up with something worth doing something over or solutions to real problems, or come up with new governance structures.
Stakeholders vote for Witnesses. End of story here in DPoS.
The fact is that we don't know who @freedom is. You've made unsubstantiated claims and I've pointed them out for what they are.
Your conclusions in your OP are to ask the community focus on something that can’t be proven to any of our benefit and is based on FUD. Thanks for nothing there.
I've written my comments to speak my mind on an important aspect of Steem.
How can I help you?
Sure! I would appreciate an answer to this question I've asked here.
Source
Who votes on the steemit Inc CEO?
Genuine question.