You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The Fundamental Underpinning of Blockchain Consensus

in #cryptocurrency • 5 years ago

Do you personally feel more secure in Steem and the value of your stake with the latest code change?

As one of the largest stakeholders on Steem (with access to that stake :D) your actions carry weight with many others in the community, as does your voice.

5 years ago in #cryptocurrency by
$0.35
  • Past Payouts $0.35
  • - Author $0.17
  • - Curators $0.17
3 votes
Reply 12
Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     5 years ago 

    I do. The huge Steemit stake was long ago promised to support onboarding and development of the Steem blockchain and I think only this promise allowed the blockchain to get established, given the huge percentage obtained by Steemit initially. Since that time, that promise has clearly been violated, and I think it's led to much of the struggle that Steem has faced in the cryptocurrency rankings.

    Also, as a purely philosophical matter, making promises then not keeping them, just ticks me off.

    [-]
     5 years ago 

    Would have liked to have seen this implemented far earlier in the history of the chain, but I guess better late than never.

    Personal philosophy matters for every individual action - some just deal in words with no follow through.

    $0.31
    • Past Payouts $0.31
    • - Author $0.16
    • - Curators $0.16
    3 votes
    Reply
    [-]
     5 years ago (edited)

    This!
    If I remember correctly, there are even on-chain interactions during the earliest days of the Steem blockchain and the ninja-mine reassuring the community that supporting community development was the justification of the majority stake amassed by Steem Inc and Steem Inc representatives. (It may have been @dantheman) I'd have to dig to find the statements I'm referring to though, as I would prefer to point directly to the comments.

    I also feel that on a fundamental level we, the community, have been deceived and the promises made to the community - yes, we can call it a social contract - have been flouted time and time again. Even if overdue, it's time for action.
    Thank you for your post and statements above, they strike a chord with many in the community, I have no doubts about that.

    $0.29
    • Past Payouts $0.29
    • - Author $0.15
    • - Curators $0.15
    4 votes
    Reply
    [-]
     5 years ago 

    Been reading a lot of the comments/concerns over this and I think this point is being missed by most -- Ned/Steemit's clear violation of the original promises made through this acquisition. I am very happy about this change and I think the people who are pissed about this would have a very different opinion if they experienced any sort of the potential downside we faced without it.

    Posted via Steemleo

    [-]
     5 years ago (edited)

    Excellent question, and as another significant stakeholder (not as large as BT though), I'll give you my answer. I haven't felt very secure about the value of my stake for some time, even less so after the sale of Steemit, but this code change gives me at least some reason for cautious optimism. We'll see how it plays out.

    The Steemit ninja-mined stake has always been a special case since day one (and one particularly terribly handled up to this point). No other stakeholder need infer any concern about their stake in my opinion (except perhaps, the significant risk that already existed of it continuing to become worthless due to mismanagement and exploitation by Steemit, and stupidity and complacency by everyone else for letting it happen), but that is just one person's view.

    [-]
     5 years ago 

    Thanks. Obviously no need to answer below :)

    Over the course of the three years I have been here, both you and BT have been voices of reason, which is why I am glad I caught you both on this topic, and your answers align.

    $0.20
    • Past Payouts $0.20
    • - Author $0.10
    • - Curators $0.10
    2 votes
    Reply