You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Statement on fork 0.22.888 / 0.22.8888
And how have their respective actions played out? I don't recall @freedom's annointed freezing anybody's stake.
And how have their respective actions played out? I don't recall @freedom's annointed freezing anybody's stake.
Only if you don't want to remember, hell I am sure Justin Sun got the idea of freezing their accounts from them freezing his. There is absolutely no difference in the action taken by both. The previous witnesses said their soft fork was because of Justin's ninja mined stake, they did not worry about it for three and a half years when @freedom (ninja mined) voted for them. So you see both sides are equally rotten, no need to try to defend or back them.
Fair point, though for it to matter you must draw an equivalence between: a temporary freeze to enforce a community agreement regarding ninja mine and a freeze of earned/bought stake due to the reasons given for this softfork. I do not see these two things as even remotely close to equal.
They may be rotten, but you will see in my previous posts that I see more hope in working with a cartel of rotten gangsters than in relying on the good graces of a lard-emperor and his appointed ministers. So, again, another thing you think is equivalent that I do not.
Having said that, I'm still going to be on Steem continuing to support communities that remain. It's taking a while for the dust to settle to see what the landscape is like before I start delegating again. I am rebalancing my portfolio overall in all asset classes so yeah, I will powerdown for sometime longer.
No, look the witnesses were ok with the ninja mine, you see the top 20 were there because of @freedom, an account whose huge stake was ninja mined, and probably belongs to either @ned or @dan, personally I go for ned. They never did anything to neutralize @ned's ninja mined stake and only took umbrage when Sun bought it, if you ask me there is also some racism involved in this.