RE: Help Test Hardfork 21!
I'll point out, there was no community feedback opportunity on the details. It was first presented that way, as a conversation starter, and then, whole hog, it was a done deal.
I have ideas about how the damage to "good actors" can be ameliorated, but the software is already written and the witnesses are hellbent on convincing us to drop our protestations and get on board. My only hope is that, if it doesn't do what they want and does hurt us more, they'll see that quickly and roll back the changes nearly immediately. But all these warnings that "as with any changes, there will be a period of pain as things adjust" make me fear that they're preparing us to grow used to a world that is duller. And that they'll be less able to see the moment when they can analyze its impact because they'll always be telling themselves it's just growing pains.
Positive changes don't always come with a period of financial pain for users, and efforts should be made to prevent those pains.
We're basically on the same page about how these kind of changes are handled. I picture this upcoming hard-fork as more of a "hail mary" than a well-thought out solution to all of the underlying issues, but, unlike yourself, I don't have a clear picture in my mind as to what could better solve them than what they've suggested (and are trying to implement into that hf).
It may not end up being a net positive or it might (fingers crossed), but, instead of waiting around to find out, I'm going into action with what tools this next hard-fork is going to provide me with (more power to determine where rewards are distributed with "free downvotes"), to do my best to try to correct what I'm convinced is sucking this community/ economy dry.