You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: My understanding and thoughts regarding this ongoing witness battle

in SCT.암호화폐.Crypto • 5 years ago

I agree that downvoting has been a vector for abuse and censorship. Solutions to the problem are necessarily limitations on downvotes, rather than complete abolition of flags. I agree the problem will need discussion and rectification - but only if Steem actually survives, which I don't think it will.

In fact, it is presently the wholly owned possession of Tron, and any illusion that stake nominal to elect consensus witnesses without Tron's approval is all that prevents folks from recognizing Tron's exclusive control and possession of Steem.

Thanks!

5 years ago in SCT.암호화폐.Crypto by
$0.00
    Reply 3
    Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     5 years ago (edited)

    Justin is stupid and going through wars that he never win in the long run. He can absorb Steem into Tron but he cannot prevent witnesses from hardforking into new Steem.

    Justin's best choice is hardfork to SteemTron then swap to Steem Token on Tron, onboarding Steemians to Tron.
    This is not different from just copy Steem Blockchain with coin name Steem token under Tron,
    and this is also not different from just airdrop Tron to Steeminans according to Steem possession and copy Steem Blockchain with it as token.
    No need to consume time and efforts on war.

    Witnesses can choose anytime to hardfork into Steem2 like golos, weku, etc.

    Current war is just war for the name STEEM listed in the current exchanges.

    They can agree to hardfork into STEEMTRON and STEEM2 and ask exchanges to list both instead of STEEM.
    In this case STEEM2 needs to burn al l the ninja-mined STEEM reducing STEEM number 300M to 200M, great.

    Steem witnesses can hardfork whenever they want to Steem again, now or during the wars, or even after the Steem-token-on-Tron era.

    We can enjoy this war, and hopefully and possibly force witnesses to accept a few improvement to achieve more decentralization.

    _1. remove downvote except for strictly iLlegal contents which should be specified in advance. Downvote should be effecive only when major witnesses make consensus to approve it case by case manually.
    _2. reduce witness vote number to 1 from current 30.
    _3. increase consensus witness number to 50 currently then 100, 200, 1000, 10k etc as time evolves from current 20, by upgrading and simplifying the witness node software so that every commons can install and run it on their some powerful PC.
    _4. adopt different powerdown period with different voting power such as 1 week 50% power, current 13 week 100 %, 52 week 200% etc, 2 year 300%, 10 year 400% etc.
    _5. whatever other improvements

    Thanks.

    [-]
     5 years ago 

    You're right about forking. It's been done before, and will be done again. Why not right now?

    I like the proposals for witness changes, but not regarding downvotes. 'Major' witnesses is not well defined for me. Also, having the witnesses authorize every downvote isn't gonna work. I agree that something needed to be done about flags. Not sure it still does, but that's something I'll be happy to consider more going forward.

    That's an interesting powerdown schedule, and I might like it. Not sure yet though.

    Thanks!

    $0.00
      Reply
      [-]
       5 years ago 

      Thank you for your opinions.

      Why I ask major or consensus witnesse's manual majority approval for downvote is

      _1. downvote should not be effective in generl
      _2. except needed to protect Steem BlockChain
      _3. when outside real world power try to disassemble Steem Blockchain for iLlegal contents, for example, with Supreme Court verdict.
      In such case, such iLlegal contents should be downvoted and hide to stop prosecutors' sue to court or Upper Court Judgement.

      Except such case, downvote should not be applied.

      That's my opinion.

      Good weekend.

      $0.00
        Reply