Are you disgusted with the fact that I am so aptly providing evidence that Steem HF23 is not theft?

I sure am!

Take this tidbit for example: many users claim that this is theft because Steem is the original chain; the original asset. How do they know it's the original chain?

Because:

• they kept the same corporate branding: Steem.
• Hive had to fight get get exchange listings (rebrand).
• the IRS defines the tax law regarding forks in this manner.
• the SEC violations are quite clearcut.

So let me get this straight...

The reason why Steem is the original chain is because centralized exchanges, corporations, the IRS, and the SEC say so? This is open source code. Branding doesn't matter. Intellectual property is IRRELEVANT. These centralized power structures do not get a say and they hold zero weight. Giving them power in this matter is exactly the opposite of why everyone should be here: decentralization.

The only thing that gives crypto value is the layer zero community.

And we scooped the vast majority of the community.

We are the original chain!

It doesn't matter what the exchanges think.
It doesn't matter what the corporations think.
It doesn't matter what the IRS thinks.
It doesn't matter what the SEC thinks.

Steem HF23 is the airdrop, Steem is the new shitcoin.

Therefore, all this talk of theft and such is very disappointing to me on a foundational level. This Hardfork can only be defined as theft if we submit to the authorities that define it as theft.

RESIST!

RESIST, GOD DAMN IT!

Is anybody listening?

• Stop voting
• Stop submitting to this false authority
• Stop asking them to solve your problems
• Stop being subservient to the slavemasters!
• Stop being 100% dependent on THEM!
• All their "favors" come with strings attached.
• THEY ARE THE ENEMY!

Maybe you're thinking:

Well, what if we submit to the authority of Hive and define it as theft there?

Yeah, that's great, except that Hive has no authority on Steem and vice versa.
That's the whole point.
Sovereign nations should stay out of the affairs of other nations.
We'd probably know that if we weren't so brainwashed by imperialist countries.

The power of decentralization.

But that's not what this post is about, right? This post is about why Steem HF23 IS THEFT. Because in this scenario we live in the real world where everyone actually still is a slave to imperialism. I bet you're so glad you didn't take the blue pill.

Welcome, to the REAL world!

Securities fraud!

When Dan and Ned pulled all their ninjamine bullshit it was to get around securities law, and they just barely pulled it off. As @theycallmedan has stated multiple times, they would not have been able to get away with that shit today. Steem had somewhat of an "immaculate conception".

By mining tons of Steem in the beginning without really telling others how to do it, and then restarting the chain when they fucked up, and then jacking up inflation and upvoting themselves when no one knew that was a thing, and then lowering the inflation so no one else could get in on that action... we can see where this is going. It's amazing that Steem was never considered a security. But there certainly was a lot of talk about why it was, and adjacently why it was also a centralized shitcoin for the same reason.

The number one reason Steem was never considered a security was the fact that Steemit Inc never voted on governance. The witnesses, and thus the very security and path of the chain, were being determined in a much more decentralized manner; one that was immune to regulation and the SEC. That obviously all changed when the Tron Foundation purchased Steemit Inc.

This is probably the main reason why @freedom has stopped voting for witnesses. Whoever that is doesn't want to touch this shitstorm with a ten-foot pole.

It's quite easy to see that @freedom is now the first in line to get fucked by the long dick of the law should it be determined that the owner of this account is operating an unregulated security. Because @freedom is not voting, that means they're relatively safe. This puts @blocktrades first in line to get fucked by the SEC.

However, because @freedom is not voting, @blocktrades can claim that they don't really control anything because @freedom has more than double the stake. If the SEC pushes the issue, @blocktrades can stop voting altogether and be like:

What about now? I'm not even voting.

From here the torch would be handed to @darthknight. By this point the SEC is going to say "fuck this" and abandon this ludicrous crusade against Hive; it's too decentralized to regulate. I repeat: even though Hive is extremely centralized, it is still WAY TOO DECENTRALIZED to regulate by a central authority like the SEC.

Decentralization/centralization is not a binary concept; it is a spectrum.

The funny part about all this is that @freedom, @blocktrades, and @darthknight could all be controlled by the same entity. If anything there is a lot of evidence to support that this cabal is a tight-knit group and they will protect each other. @blocktrades, @darthknight, and a handful of other significant accounts have even been shown to deposit funds into identical centralized exchange accounts (on Binance I believe).

None of that really matters.

The SEC will not be able to figure out how we operate.
Our operations are greatly obscured by pseudo anonymity.
This dynamic is a huge pain in the ass for any kind of regulation.
They will not pursue the issue.
This is especially true now that the ninjamine is 'gone'.
_{You assholes should have destroyed it.}

---

What if...

This is where it get's interesting! What if, for example, I were to create a killer dapp here and bring a shit ton of value to the network? What if I somehow acquired like 80M coins and started voting in witnesses? Would I now be in violation of securities law even though I built up all the value from nothing? Honestly, I have no idea.

---

Talk shit about Justin Sun! God I hate him!

Easy there, tiger.
Although I guess that was the intended purpose of this post.

Steemit Inc.

What STINC has done in this situation is transform an asset that MIGHT have been a security into one that 100% DEFINITELY IS A SECURITY. It is not hard to show that Steemit Inc runs the show. They should have done a better job shuffling money around and making it look like everything was legit. They are total scrubs.

In any case...

Steem can now be viewed as a security. Personally Steem is so centralized I fully view it as a more of a stock in the company Steemit Inc, just like Binance Coin BNB is stock in Binance.

So imagine you buy stock in a company (in this case Steemit INC) and that company just decides it's going to delete/move your stake in the company!

Justin Sun is trying to have it both ways.

He tried to buy us out in a hostile takeover just like one would do in the stock market, and then he used his majority share holding to do the one thing that the majority share holder is never allowed to do: delete/move other people's stake.

It's hilarious!

Chalk it up to blockchain being new and having zero regulation because no one knows how to regulate it. The more decentralized crytpo gets the harder it becomes to regulate, so no one knows what to do about regulation. Catch-22.

This is why the theft is quite obvious!

Justin Sun broke the cardinal-rule of securities law; the first and foremost rule of the entire system and the only reason that the stock market can exist in the first place: NEVER EVER EVER EVER modify someone's stake without their permission.

The reason why I so fervently took the position that Steem HF23 is not theft is because then I would have to admit that Hive HF23 was theft.

Let's do some metal gymnastics to get over that hurdle, shall we?

What a fun little GIF that aligns with my left-wing atheist foundations!

Too bad it's not more relevant to the topic at hand!

In any case, yes, Hive HF23 is theft! However, I've come to realize it is also not theft!

---

Jesus Christ man! Can you pick a side already?

No.

Okay, so let me explain myself. HF23 is theft, because we stole from Justin Sun, but it is also not theft, because Justin Sun is a terrorist.

Correct, Justin Sun is a criminal.

He engaged in war crimes against the great nation of Steem, so much so that we had to rebuild our entire country on the new chain and cut him out of it. To say that we stole funds from Justin Sun would be like saying a bank stole money from a terrorist. It's a wholly asinine argument. We did not steal from Justin Sun; we "reappropriated the funds of a criminal".

Sorted.

Justin Sun literally forced us to steal from him. We didn't want to do it. Anyone who was part of the hours and hours and hours of MSP Waves discussions could see that our country did not have consensus to steal his money. I would just like to point out that I was EXTREMELY on record of wanting just that, so much so that I detailed my plan for SCORCHED EARTH multiple times.

However, we used mental gymnastics regarding the Hive fork to trick a lot of people into a new line of thinking:

It is not theft:

• The SEC says so.
• The IRS says so.
• The exchanges agree.
• The corporations agree.

You see, Justin Sun engaged in the most egregious front-line attack against the Steem blockchain possible. He hit us front and center at our greatest weakness: stake-based voting acquired by a massive under-the-table discount.

The problem with that...

The world does not accept that Steem/Hive is a sovereign nation. The world does not understand blockchain. The world does not realize that what Justin Sun did was the ULTIMATE war crime against us. Therefore we had to play another game, where instead of proving that Justin Sun is indeed a criminal and a terrorist we simply 'prove' that we didn't steal money from him.

We most definitely did steal money from him, but he's a fucking imperialist who's trying to financially enslave us. Crime is defined by the authority that defines crime. If consensus on Hive is that we didn't steal anything, that's good enough for me. However, the same is true for Steem. If Steem consensus is that they didn't steal anything, I'm fine with that too. I'm more than willing to continue to accept Steem sovereignty (even though I arguably shouldn't).

Good thing it doesn't really matter what I think, amiright? The powers that shouldn't be are going to align with us (and against Steemit Inc) in this blatant 'theft'. The IRS, SEC, corporations, and exchanges are all in agreement: Steem HF23 was theft and Hive HF23 was not. This early in the game that's all that matters. Talk to me again in ten years.

The attack on Steem.

The other thing I desperately need to talk about is the justification of why Steem HF23 needed to happen. They claim to be protecting the network from malicious actors.

Is this true?

Now, the biggest argument against this line of thinking is obvious: of course they were not defending the network from attack. In fact as I have already explained in this post:

Wow! 17586 Block Difference!

The direct result of freezing accounts on Steem with a soft-fork resulted in the blockchain being rolled back over and over again. So many blocks were lost!

This was because the accounts that were being frozen with the soft-fork were still attempting to move their funds. Every time a rogue witness added those transactions into a block the main witnesses had to rollback the chain.

The hardfork changed all that. Now that there is no money left in the accounts they no longer need to be frozen, so from that perspective the Steem blockchain has been secured.

However, this still leaves us with the original argument: everything would have been just fine if they had never frozen accounts in the first place. This is unfortunately also false.

Normally when a fork happens everyone invovled has a choice to make:

Do you:

• Keep both tokens and wish both projects the best.
• Sell one token for the other because you support one side.

This put Hive at a huge advantage, because we nullified 80M coins worth of stake that couldn't be dumped on the market. It only makes logical sense that in return the "original" DPOS chain would also be allowed to nullify stake against the opposition.

Justin Sun and the new Steem witnesses have been holding their bags open this entire time trying to keep Steem afloat. Letting the value of the coin sink too far on the open market would look really bad, cause a lack of confidence, and possibly create a death-spiral for the Steem blockchain.

With this in mind, it makes perfect sense that the justifications for Steem HF23 are indeed accurate. They most certainly are protecting the network from harm. However, none of that matters because "protecting the network from harm" and "illegal theft" are no longer mutually exclusive. By securing the network with Steem HF23 the witnesses have done both: secure the network and broke the law.

Hold this bag, Bitch!
_{---Literally everyone dumping Steem.}

HOWEVER!

It is EXTREMELY important to note that the only reason why Steem HF23 is theft is because Steem is a security. If Steem was still decentralized enough to avoid regulation it would absolutely not be theft, and even if it was, it would be impossible to enforce justice, given the very nature of decentralization.

Conclusion

Was Hive HF23 theft? Yes. But it was justified theft against hostile criminal attackers, making it not theft. However, we were forced to lie to the world and pretend like it wasn't theft because the world does not agree that a crime was committed.

Was Steem HF23 theft? Also yes. Not only was it theft, but it is centralized theft that is actually possible to prosecute and deliver justice for, unlike Hive's righteously justified decentralized theft. Steem can now be considered a stock (security) and Justin Sun has violated the #1 law for securities: don't fuck with stakeholders.

Part 1: Playing Devil's Advocate.
Part 2: Blocktrades explains why a fork is not theft.

I hope with this final post in the series we can all see that I am not some boot-licking Tron Foundation turncoat. I just wanted to argue both sides. Let us move on from this shitshow and return to a "new normal". kek.