create account

Steem Governance is Multiparty by steemitblog

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com
· @steemitblog · (edited)
Steem Governance is Multiparty
In a [recent post](https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/hf20-update-operations-stable) we stated the following about how we plan to move forward from the rollout of HF20:

> We have already begun discussions with the Witnesses about developing common standards, not just for testing code, but for holding Steem developers, such as us, accountable to their needs, and the needs of the community members they represent. We believe the system that will emerge from this will be far more mature, effective, and powerful than the methods in place prior to Hardfork 20. We are excited about the potential for positive change that will emerge from the challenges we have faced, and will continue to face, as a community.

In today’s post we would like to explore this issue further and share our thoughts on how Steem’s governance can function best.

<h1>3 Major Steem Groups</h1>

There are three major groups within the Steem ecosystem: Steem holders, Witnesses, and blockchain developers. The Witnesses are the gatekeepers of the code. It is ultimately their decision whether code that is created by developers should be adopted and implemented in Steem. This is the role Witnesses are elected to serve by the Steem holders, which consists of the users of Steem DApps and the businesses that build those DApps.

<h2>Witnesses</h2>

In order for Steem blockchain developers (like Steemit) to produce code as effectively as possible, and Steem holders to be as informed as possible, we believe that it would be a substantial benefit to the ecosystem for each Witness to publish the standards that each will hold for proposed Steem code, as well as standards they will apply to the development process used to create that new code. These would be the standards they are committed to enforcing before they would consider adopting and running code in a new version of Steem. We also believe these should include additional standards for each Witnesses’ own procedure which would ensure that their requirements for new code are met.  

<h3>Verification Standards</h3>

We would expect that the standards governing the Witness’ own process for verifying code, and verifying that code process standards are met, would include information and documentation about each Witnesses’ code testing apparatus, or that employed by whomever performs their code review. We expect further that Witnesses who leverage their own apparatus for code review would be much more valuable to Steem than Witnesses who do not.  We believe that HF20 has clearly demonstrated that testing attitudes need to be more conservative, inclusive, and rigorous, and that this proposal for Standards is much more in line with conservative development. 


Some Witnesses have already taken it upon themselves to propose such standards. @reggaemuffin, for example, [published the standards he would apply](https://steemit.com/witness-update/@reggaemuffin/witness-statement-for-reggaemuffin-proposing-hardfork-adoption-requirements) when determining whether to adopt a hardfork, as well as the actions he pledges to perform himself. @reggaemuffin also shared additional standards that would be followed in the event they were made a top 20 witness. @bobinson has also published a [thoughtful post](https://steemit.com/witness-category/@bobinson/an-appeal-to-steem-communities-publish-a-report-expectations-and-suggestions-on-hardfork)  outlining how he plans to proceed. There have been several other Standards published as well.  Some are more low level and some are more high level.

We have not evaluated these standards in sufficient depth and will refrain from doing so until we publish our own. In the meantime, we are very encouraged to see that this process has already begun.  We believe it is important that we, as a community, find a [Goldilock’s moment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldilocks_principle) where the community’s Standards in aggregate are “just right.”

<h2>Developers</h2>

Steemit, Inc. is currently going through our own HF20 post-mortem, which we have no doubt will reveal unacceptable flaws in our process, and result in us developing and publishing our own standards for the Witnesses and Steem holders to review. We believe that governance on Steem is close to functioning very well, and the conversation that will now ensue is how to make it much better and empower more Steem holders than ever. 

<h2>Users and Businesses</h2>

Through this process of publishing standards, Steem users and businesses will be able to hold those Witnesses accountable to their published Standards, and *must* hold them accountable. With Steem comes the responsibility to elect responsible gatekeepers of Steem code and voice your ideas for improving the ecosystem.  It is your votes, after all, that determine who occupies these important gatekeeper positions. And it is the people who occupy those positions who will be responsible for communicating to us what code they will approve, and what standards that code has to meet. With such standards in place, it will become abundantly clear to everyone which Witnesses successfully, or unsuccessfully,  work within established standards. 

![Screen Shot 2018-10-11 at 4.31.40 PM.png](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmZejSvZxuDGeYyYpFZEXFc1Soep4x9vRhHTStSjw4Pe1e/Screen%20Shot%202018-10-11%20at%204.31.40%20PM.png)

We are holding ourselves accountable for how HF20 transpired, and know the community wants to hold itself accountable as well. This is about coming together as a community to establish a clear path forward so that all the critical groups within this ecosystem can focus on their responsibilities, communicate their requirements efficiently to one another, and accelerate consensus. 

<h1>Empowering All Constituents</h1>

We believe that this system has the potential to truly empower each one of these Steem constituents. It empowers the Witnesses by encouraging, even demanding, that they develop standards with respect to which the developers must comply. This, in turn, empowers the developers by giving them clear guidelines that they can follow knowing that, if they meet those standards, their code will eventually be adopted. And it empowers Steem holders who, through Witness voting, determine what standards are developed for the purpose of gatekeeping new code. 

Steem empowers all of us, but with power comes responsibility, and we believe that the most important responsibility right now is the pressing need *for all Witnesses* to actively develop and communicate reasonable code acceptance standards that will enable us to hold one another accountable. I expect some Witness Standards to evolve through community discourse on this topic. I encourage everyone to be open minded to new concepts of Standards and steadfast in convictions toward finding a [Goldilocks](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldilocks_principle)  inflection point so that all of Steem benefits optimally from future upgrades to the chain.

_Steemit CEO, Ned Scott_ 

<div class="pull-left">  
    <div class="pull-left">  
       https://i.imgur.com/xqBVWRA.jpg  
    </div> 
</div>
👍  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and 85 others
👎  
properties (23)
authorsteemitblog
permlinksteem-governance-is-multiparty
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem","blockchain","hf20","hardfork"],"users":["reggaemuffin","bobinson"],"image":["https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmZejSvZxuDGeYyYpFZEXFc1Soep4x9vRhHTStSjw4Pe1e/Screen%20Shot%202018-10-11%20at%204.31.40%20PM.png","https://i.imgur.com/xqBVWRA.jpg"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/hf20-update-operations-stable","https://steemit.com/witness-update/@reggaemuffin/witness-statement-for-reggaemuffin-proposing-hardfork-adoption-requirements","https://steemit.com/witness-category/@bobinson/an-appeal-to-steem-communities-publish-a-report-expectations-and-suggestions-on-hardfork","https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldilocks_principle"],"app":"steemit/0.1","format":"markdown"}
created2018-10-12 14:36:12
last_update2018-10-12 14:36:48
depth0
children90
last_payout2018-10-19 14:36:12
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length7,106
author_reputation332,472,558,821,177
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout0.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,151,037
net_rshares30,830,048,109,990
author_curate_reward""
vote details (150)
@aggroed ·
$0.13
My response is lengthy.  I've posted it here: https://steemit.com/steem/@aggroed/to-ned-re-roles
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authoraggroed
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t032942559z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@aggroed/to-ned-re-roles"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-13 03:29:39
last_update2018-10-13 03:29:39
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-20 03:29:39
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.096 HBD
curator_payout_value0.031 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length96
author_reputation1,363,325,014,907,497
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,186,320
net_rshares95,125,268,177
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@bashadow ·
$0.03
I think that steemit is at a stage now after HF20 where it needs to go into the new year 2019, with a clear understanding of ***expectations***. Tell the witnesses clearly what you (the company) expects of the witnesses, let the witness tell you (the company) what they expect from you. Provide each other the tools and the means to reach and understand the expectations, and provide a means of redress when expectations are not met.  By working with each other I am sure that both parties can come up with reasonable expectations of each other that will be able to meet a standards test. (were the expectations met)
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorbashadow
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t200735350z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-13 20:07:24
last_update2018-10-13 20:07:24
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-20 20:07:24
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.024 HBD
curator_payout_value0.006 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length616
author_reputation100,388,692,638,882
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,232,255
net_rshares25,669,240,875
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@bobinson ·
$1.49
This is an excellent step & this will make eventually leads to the "Escape Velocity" needed to reach the moon. While the Witness process aka Consortium creation in many blockchains are either in experimental stage or controlled by companies, we definitely have a  mechanism where the token holders can at-least have a say whether he is an exchange or a new user.

> right now is the pressing need for all Witnesses to actively develop and communicate reasonable code acceptance standards that will enable us to hold one another accountable. 

Few of us @reggaemuffin, @yuriks2000 @yehey & others  are working on a model & we have a living document  here :  https://hackmd.io/s/ByT1BuG5m Witnesses and communities can collaborate and share their ideas. That will help everyone to reach conclusions quicker than someone, say steemit inc trying to find all the information and put a logical order to it. 

From my end,  it will take a bit more time to reach even a draft format as I feel its essential to have a clear problem statement and collect information from all the stake holders.


For the sake of transparency, my personal intention is  also to submit a paper at the following IEEE https://www.comsnets.org/blockchain_workshop.html  regarding 

- Real world experiences from deployments of blockchain

- Innovative use cases which leverage blockchain

This will not only give the effort a formal approach but we (STEEM) will be noticed in the academic world as a very different blockchain ie decentralized.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorbobinson
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t153309504z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["reggaemuffin","yuriks2000","yehey"],"links":["https://hackmd.io/s/ByT1BuG5m","https://www.comsnets.org/blockchain_workshop.html"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 15:33:12
last_update2018-10-12 15:33:12
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 15:33:12
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.134 HBD
curator_payout_value0.355 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,512
author_reputation55,343,141,313,811
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,154,864
net_rshares1,107,522,149,306
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@clayboyn · (edited)
$1.35
I have a suggestion to work around some of the issues that I've seen over the last two plus years of being actively involved in this platform.  I've certainly gone through phases of love/hate with Steemit Inc and even many of the witnesses, but in the end I honestly feel that everyone simply wants this platform to succeed and is doing what they feel is best.  That being said I have a suggestion to all of the Witnesses and Steemit Inc:

Please change the way consensus is decided to remove the ability for any one account, no matter how large to have controlling interest in deciding consensus.  This isn't just me complaining or bitching about something that may be seen as FUD, I have an actual recommendation on how to do this and you can feel free to debate it here.  I think the rewards structures for witnesses needs to be changed from a top 20 plateau and then massive drop off that we currently have to a top 50 exponential curve.  Essentially what I'm saying here is the top witness (number 1) pay stays the same and then have a more rounded exponential curve going down to fifty and hopefully continue the smooth slope further outward.  This encourages competition and activity to keep working and moving forward instead of "just hitting the top twenty and staying there."  Furthermore I suggest changing consensus and the fact that blocks are predominately created by the top twenty to spread out over the top 50 spots as well.

If accounts have 30 votes and can massively influence the top twenty witness spots as is, why wouldn't we want a more balanced system that actually allows more than one or two massive accounts to have controlling decision making ability over who gets to decide consensus.  I love the platform and I'm not trying to spread FUD or misinformation here, but the facts remain that as it currently stands top twenty witnesses only need to pacify the interests of about 8 accounts to disregard the rest of the platform entirely.  I think increasing the amount of witnesses needed for consensus makes this system more fair and balanced and removes the possibility that one account could even possibly control the decision making process by requiring a super majority greater than thirty votes.

These are just my thoughts and hope they inspire some constructive conversation on how we can all work together to make the platform better.  It's not an attack and it's not a conspiracy theory, it's simply me sharing my perspective and I hope it comes across that way.  Much love everyone, and as a buddy of mine has said repeatedly in the past: 

"We all go to the same moon."
👍  
properties (23)
authorclayboyn
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t201556431z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-15 20:15:57
last_update2018-10-15 20:29:24
depth1
children1
last_payout2018-10-22 20:15:57
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.013 HBD
curator_payout_value0.337 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,608
author_reputation376,308,191,047,616
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,365,659
net_rshares1,063,773,670,644
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@teamsteem ·
> I think the rewards structures for witnesses needs to be changed from a top 20 plateau

I totally agree and there already exists a much more logical system that has been implemented on at least one other DPOS chain.
👍  
properties (23)
authorteamsteem
permlinkre-clayboyn-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t204015488z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-15 20:40:15
last_update2018-10-15 20:40:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2018-10-22 20:40:15
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length217
author_reputation284,804,541,406,803
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,366,803
net_rshares5,176,095,856
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@develcuy ·
$1.16
<blockquote>We have not evaluated these standards in sufficient depth and will refrain from doing so until we publish our own</blockquote>

@ned, you have a great idea but your proposal is wrong from start to end. Again, you really need a good CTO to take care of STINC's technical strategy!  You aren't attacking the root cause, HF20 was a disaster because you had nobody able to forecast it, which reveals lack of technical leadership. Your company needs an strong and competent CTO, one that you can respect and tell you: "No Ned".

The first mistake is ask each witness to publish their own standard. There are tens of witnesses so we can expect to have tens of proposed standards. The second mistake is to suppose that your dev team will be able to follow all or even a few of the standards, when they are likely to overlap. The third mistake is to assume that witnesses have enough technical skills and incentive to spend a fair amount of time creating, maintaining and assessing their standards.

This is the right thing to do IMHO:
1. Release your own draft standard
2. Ask witnesses for feedback (within a timeframe)
3. Improve your standards (within a timeframe)
4. Publish the official standard (on an scheduled date)
5. Start working on HF21
6. Repeat on every HF

Just my 2c.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authordevelcuy
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t054048669z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["ned"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-15 05:40:54
last_update2018-10-15 05:40:54
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-22 05:40:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.874 HBD
curator_payout_value0.290 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,288
author_reputation4,853,554,441,622
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd0
post_id73,319,470
net_rshares893,513,388,125
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@distantsignal ·
Glad to hear that standards and a need for conservative development are taking root.  I also like the fact that stakeholders are reminded that their witness votes really matter in this ecosystem.  It's one of the reasons I like Steem.  Stewards of the Steem chain can be held directly accountable for bad decisions and they're more distributed than the likes of Facebook.  

As the network grows, is there the possibility that the number of top witnesses can increase for more representation on the network or will it always remain at 21?  Does it even matter?  Just curious.
properties (22)
authordistantsignal
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t170118822z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"community":"steempeak","app":"steempeak"}
created2018-10-12 17:01:21
last_update2018-10-12 17:01:21
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 17:01:21
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length575
author_reputation32,496,313,953,302
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,159,833
net_rshares0
@freebornangel ·
Tick tock,...
properties (22)
authorfreebornangel
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t152212105z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 15:22:18
last_update2018-10-12 15:22:18
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 15:22:18
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length13
author_reputation171,005,551,503,977
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,154,153
net_rshares0
@friendly-fenix ·
Interesting read @steemitblog, thanks for sharing this Ned Scott.  I will try and assimilate all this...

Cheers!

/FF
properties (22)
authorfriendly-fenix
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t035310815z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["steemitblog"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-15 03:53:12
last_update2018-10-15 03:53:12
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-22 03:53:12
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length118
author_reputation6,283,336,485,983
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,314,773
net_rshares0
@gadrian ·
I'm glad this discussion on the roles of the parties involved in the blockchain has been stirred.

Maybe it should have been earlier?
properties (22)
authorgadrian
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t110505114z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-13 11:05:06
last_update2018-10-13 11:05:06
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-20 11:05:06
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length133
author_reputation642,831,013,067,672
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,204,211
net_rshares0
@geekgirl ·
$0.12
I was reading interesting discussion in [a post](https://steemit.com/buysteem/@berniesanders/upvote-your-own-content) by @berniesanders earlies regarding attracting new investors to Steem. Also, read [a post](https://steemit.com/steem/@whatsup/we-have-35-whales-285-orcas-1788-dolpins-and-8823-minnows) by @whatsup regarding current state of active users and their stakes. Since I see an arrow "proposing ideas" by users to Steemit Inc, I would like to share the following idea. 

***Steemit Inc backed SP delegation contracts to all or new liquid Steem holders to attract crypto hodlers during bear markets.*** One of the reasons new investors don't easily get into Steem is they can't easily withdraw their assets due to 3 months wait of power down. 

Steemit Inc is the largest stakeholder and doesn't use its SP. What I propose is to delegate SP to those who buy Steem and hold as liquid in the accounts matching the amounts of liquid Steem they hold for a very small symbolic fee. This will give investors an option to withdraw anytime. SP will be undelegated the moment they withdraw. This will attract crypto hodlers to park their assets in Steem, earn while they hodl, and get to know Steem. Once they get to know Steem from within they may end up powering up down the road.

This may sound like a dumb idea. If so just ignore. Just trying to think outside the box.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorgeekgirl
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t211902451z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["berniesanders","whatsup"],"links":["https://steemit.com/buysteem/@berniesanders/upvote-your-own-content","https://steemit.com/steem/@whatsup/we-have-35-whales-285-orcas-1788-dolpins-and-8823-minnows"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 21:19:03
last_update2018-10-12 21:19:03
depth1
children4
last_payout2018-10-19 21:19:03
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.092 HBD
curator_payout_value0.028 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,373
author_reputation1,588,017,852,468,897
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,171,611
net_rshares91,225,998,504
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@abh12345 ·
$0.37
This will come I think, but not via Steemit.inc.

And, I have heard many talk of the vesting withdrawal time (which was once much greater) being part of the lure to Steem, as a role to play in stability of the token.
👍  
properties (23)
authorabh12345
permlinkre-geekgirl-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t225716187z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 22:57:15
last_update2018-10-12 22:57:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 22:57:15
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.275 HBD
curator_payout_value0.091 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length216
author_reputation1,408,615,966,842,648
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,175,626
net_rshares270,207,693,737
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@coolenglish ·
$0.37
New investors can buy Steem and hodl it without powering up, and withdraw it whenever they want. It's up to them whether to power up or not.

How would this plan stop current investors from powering down, creating new accounts, and getting the delegated SP?
👍  
properties (23)
authorcoolenglish
permlinkre-geekgirl-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181014t223224928z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"community":"steempeak","app":"steempeak"}
created2018-10-14 22:32:27
last_update2018-10-14 22:32:27
depth2
children1
last_payout2018-10-21 22:32:27
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.280 HBD
curator_payout_value0.093 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length257
author_reputation8,120,888,862,986
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,302,570
net_rshares289,493,650,750
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@geekgirl ·
Your are right, powering up or holding as liquid are the options investors have. Powering up might not be attractive for some because of 3 month lock of assets. Holding as liquid may not be attractive for some because there are many other options.

Third option I suggeated, I believe would attract many investors who already hold crypto assets. 

Steemit Inc has enough SP to cover all new or old users. I doubt many whales would take advantage of it, as they would lose an ability to delegate themselves. 

Once investors are in and get to know the Steem blockchain I believe they would choose to power up themselves.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorgeekgirl
permlinkre-coolenglish-re-geekgirl-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t003959243z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-15 00:40:00
last_update2018-10-15 00:40:00
depth3
children0
last_payout2018-10-22 00:40:00
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length619
author_reputation1,588,017,852,468,897
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,307,415
net_rshares3,323,803,500
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@sirknight ·
At first read it sounded like a good idea to this Knight, geekgirl. However, thinking about it further - why should newbies get preferential access to tyhe reward pool over current investors?

Three months is not a long time to stake funds anyhow. Think of term deposits. Three month TDs are very common.

SirKnight.

Posted using [Partiko Android](https://steemit.com/@partiko-android)
properties (22)
authorsirknight
permlinksirknight-re-geekgirl-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t131608737z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"app":"partiko"}
created2018-10-15 13:16:09
last_update2018-10-15 13:16:09
depth2
children0
last_payout2018-10-22 13:16:09
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length386
author_reputation53,196,025,704,748
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,341,215
net_rshares0
@lays ·
$0.11
@steemitblog @ned You guys have to Answer never happen in last 2 year of my steemit carrier  why my post payout sudden dissappear for example my post pending payout was 76$ and only 1 minute was left in payout sudden it become 55$ and curation 10$ so i got 45$ where 20$ gone ? my all friends also facing the same issue is there any one who can answer this question ??
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorlays
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t194429752z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["steemitblog","ned"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-13 19:44:45
last_update2018-10-13 19:44:45
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-20 19:44:45
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.084 HBD
curator_payout_value0.027 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length368
author_reputation51,827,894,908,559
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,231,285
net_rshares85,798,696,882
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@movievigilante ·
Why doesn't the Steemit blog have a profile icon?
properties (22)
authormovievigilante
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t002306572z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"community":"busy","app":"busy/2.5.6","format":"markdown","tags":["steem"],"users":[],"links":[],"image":[]}
created2018-10-13 00:23:09
last_update2018-10-13 00:23:09
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-20 00:23:09
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length49
author_reputation780,715,696,061
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,178,738
net_rshares0
@nokodemion · (edited)
$0.06
These crypto lunatics commenting know nothing...
👍  
properties (23)
authornokodemion
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t182200127z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 18:22:00
last_update2018-10-12 18:22:51
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 18:22:00
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.044 HBD
curator_payout_value0.014 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length48
author_reputation6,059,124,243,903
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,163,820
net_rshares43,345,816,515
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@paulag ·
$0.39
I don't understand why so many are holding steemit inc accountable so much.  STEEM is a decentralized blockchain and no one entity or person is responsible.  As a steem holder, thank you for this statement.  As a steem witness I also need to take responsibility and we are putting steps in place now so we can add more value and better standards. announcement coming soon from @steemcommunity witness
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorpaulag
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t224746938z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["steemcommunity"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 22:47:48
last_update2018-10-12 22:47:48
depth1
children1
last_payout2018-10-19 22:47:48
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.296 HBD
curator_payout_value0.097 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length400
author_reputation274,264,287,951,003
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,175,283
net_rshares290,297,647,971
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@develcuy ·
@paulag if nobody is responsible then the game is over. Someone has to be accountable and fix its mess, in this case we have many people involved and I'm happy to see many of them working hard to have a quite better HF21. Others don't care and those are the witnesses that I'm never voting for ever again.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authordevelcuy
permlinkre-paulag-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181016t225920456z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["paulag"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-16 22:59:27
last_update2018-10-16 22:59:27
depth2
children0
last_payout2018-10-23 22:59:27
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length305
author_reputation4,853,554,441,622
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd0
post_id73,441,426
net_rshares0
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@roselover ·
It's very important news for us
We must follow all the advances that occur and the challenges
Thank you for the wonderful effort
properties (22)
authorroselover
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t145332330z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 14:53:33
last_update2018-10-12 14:53:33
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 14:53:33
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length128
author_reputation3,636,502,956,599
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,152,119
net_rshares0
@sathyasankar ·
A lot of what you have discussed here is very hard to understand for me as a non-developer. But as someone who has been here for the last 9 months, I can surely say that people behind steem are working hard to make it far better.
properties (22)
authorsathyasankar
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t155732929z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 15:57:33
last_update2018-10-12 15:57:33
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 15:57:33
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length229
author_reputation25,037,930,470,038
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,156,317
net_rshares0
@sexcuss ·
$0.35
No, it's predominantly owned by StInc. STEEM is the furthest cryptocurrency from decentralisation. It's probably more centralised than some of the fiat currencies.

If StInc continues to screw up, I guarantee there will be a hard-fork of Steem away from StInc initiated by the frustrated crowds. Mark my words.

Posted using [Partiko Android](https://steemit.com/@partiko-android)
👍  , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorsexcuss
permlinksexcuss-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t165051537z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"app":"partiko"}
created2018-10-13 16:50:51
last_update2018-10-13 16:50:51
depth1
children1
last_payout2018-10-20 16:50:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.265 HBD
curator_payout_value0.086 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length380
author_reputation-526,231,290,466
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,222,921
net_rshares266,956,235,741
author_curate_reward""
vote details (6)
@treeplanter ·
Thanks for your donation
<center><h3>You just planted 0.10 tree(s)!</h3>
Thanks to @bsfmalaysia 
<h3>We have planted already 4767.64 trees
 out of 1,000,000<h3>
Let's save and restore Abongphen Highland Forest
in Cameroonian village Kedjom-Keku!
Plant trees with @treeplanter and get paid for it!
My Steem Power = 20493.32
Thanks a lot!
 @martin.mikes coordinator of @kedjom-keku
![treeplantermessage_ok.png](https://steemitimages.com/DQmdeFhTevmcmLvubxMMDoYBoNSaz4ftt7PxktmLDmF2WGg/treeplantermessage_ok.png)</center>
properties (22)
authortreeplanter
permlinkre-sexcuss-sexcuss-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181014t225229437z
categorysteem
json_metadata{}
created2018-10-14 22:52:30
last_update2018-10-14 22:52:30
depth2
children0
last_payout2018-10-21 22:52:30
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length493
author_reputation62,929,728,687,402
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,303,370
net_rshares0
@socky · (edited)
$2.44
Publishing standards is a terrific start. Thank you. 

I would like to see those standards published in a place that is not a blog entry where it can be forgotten days or weeks later. 

It is wonderful that Steemit Inc believes that witnesses should publish their verification of code, however pushing that responsibility to the witnesses may not be the answer. I don't feel that many users realize or understand if the verification is actually done properly. Steemit Inc really needs to have check boxes of their own and audits to verify if witnesses have done an acceptable job in verifying/testing code. 

To put is simply, you wouldn't put a fireman, bus driver, mechanic, grade school teacher, nurse, salesperson, construction worker, etc. in charge of and to verify a person is actually testing software properly. Then why are you asking us as voters for witnesses to do the same?

Another way to put it is when you have users select the witnesses by how well they tested the code is like employing accountants to inspect building construction ensure that they meet acceptable quality building standards. They are not going to know if the job was done correctly or not. if you want someone to do the inspection, you get the qualified people in place. Don't give the job to people that have no idea how to do it. The reality is that users will vote witnesses by how well they present themselves as if they did something regardless if they actually did the work. If they can make their presentation believable, then that is all that is needed to get votes. It would be like the accountant inspecting a building and beautiful sheet rock and paint covering up serious structural, plumbing, and electrical issues. The accountant would look at it and think a great job was done, but a year later the roof falls in, there is an electrical fire, or flooding happens.  

### Get the right people to verify that the witnesses have done the job properly.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorsocky
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t165805650z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 16:58:39
last_update2018-10-12 20:52:45
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 16:58:39
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.828 HBD
curator_payout_value0.607 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,949
author_reputation196,950,889,547,677
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,159,660
net_rshares1,788,353,165,289
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@tarazkp ·
For ease of evaluation of witnesses, will there be a core standard that all (esp top 20) must adopt? If each witness has vastly different ideas, it makes it near impossible to track.
properties (22)
authortarazkp
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t145551021z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 14:55:51
last_update2018-10-12 14:55:51
depth1
children3
last_payout2018-10-19 14:55:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length182
author_reputation5,907,848,043,851,381
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,152,255
net_rshares0
@andrarchy ·
"Must adopt?" According to whom? If the community of stakeholders come to a consensus over core standards, they are the only ones who can "force" the witnesses to do anything. So if you want there to be core standards that the witnesses have to adopt, then you--and everyone who agrees with you--has to come together to develop those standards and enforce them with your vote. That is the point that we are trying to communicate. There is no benevolent dictator who is going to solve these problems for us. We have to come together as a community to develop common standards. We don't have to agree on EVERYTHING, but we have to at least agree on the standards to which we will hold one another. That being said, I think we are already well on our way toward doing this. I think this is more about maturing as a community, improving our tools, and improving incrementally how we communicate with one another. We just have to keep evolving and improving as a community. This isn't about paradigm shifts, it's about iterative change in a positive direction.
👍  
properties (23)
authorandrarchy
permlinkre-tarazkp-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t151657841z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 15:16:57
last_update2018-10-12 15:16:57
depth2
children2
last_payout2018-10-19 15:16:57
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,055
author_reputation230,168,201,522,782
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout0.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,153,740
net_rshares0
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@tarazkp ·
*Must* was the wrong word. 

I meant that a standard core that they agree upon that gives some kind of base from which to work, a minimum level. I read @reggaemuffin's proposal but for the average user (myself included) it is going to be very difficult to get the head around without expert understanding let alone if there are 50 variations versions floating around in posts lost to time etc. 

So will there be a proposal put forward that can be tweaked by discussion to reach some standard form that a witness can agree to and then we as community can vote accordingly based on at least that base level of standardization. And then the possibility to see clearly which witnesses agreed to it and which didn't? 

It is already difficult to know what all the witnesses are working on etc so having some way to know that there is at least a base level met would make things somewhat easier to track for less technical users who don't live 24/7 on Steem or in the processes of software development. 

Of course, it is up to the community to develop the interfaces, the understanding  and our responsibility to keep track of the 200+ witnesses and their comings and goings each day but it might be easier with a tool or two.
properties (22)
authortarazkp
permlinkre-andrarchy-re-tarazkp-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t154322293z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["reggaemuffin"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 15:43:15
last_update2018-10-12 15:43:15
depth3
children1
last_payout2018-10-19 15:43:15
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,222
author_reputation5,907,848,043,851,381
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,155,551
net_rshares0
@tarekadam · (edited)
I like the suggestion to get more transparency from witnesses on what they do and what their  standards are. We as voters should only select   witnesses who actively participate in the development of the Steem blockchain. It should be the goal for witnesses to compete for the top 21 spots by showing the community what they are doing and how they add value. That way votes will shift very quickly to witnesses that do more than just the minimum of running a node.

Posted using [Partiko Android](https://steemit.com/@partiko-android)
properties (22)
authortarekadam
permlinktarekadam-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t145827993z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"app":"partiko"}
created2018-10-12 14:58:27
last_update2018-10-12 15:01:03
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 14:58:27
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length534
author_reputation50,131,776,387,207
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,152,401
net_rshares0
@taskmaster4450 ·
$1.31
This is good news.  It is important to learn from mistakes and move forward to a higher level.  There were issues with hard fork 20 and we all have responsibility for what took place.  It appears all were complacent with how things were going.

Since that time, I stressed it is crucial for the users to do their best to understand what the Witnesses are doing and to vote accordingly.  We are the ones who allow them to be in the position they are.   The community, myself included, did not take monitoring what the Witnesses were doing serious enough.

It is good if standards are set and protocols established.  This will allow the community members to have a barometer which to judge the Witnesses.  Since many of us are not techies, delving into that arena can be difficult.  Spelling out the expectations and standards of conduct would go a long way for all.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authortaskmaster4450
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t144549967z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"community":"busy","app":"busy/2.5.6","format":"markdown","tags":["steem"],"users":[],"links":[],"image":[]}
created2018-10-12 14:45:51
last_update2018-10-12 14:45:51
depth1
children1
last_payout2018-10-19 14:45:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.027 HBD
curator_payout_value0.283 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length865
author_reputation6,701,388,612,935,665
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,151,656
net_rshares999,073,156,824
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@felt.buzz ·
Re our responsibility for monitoring witnesses I agree. I think a lot of us (and when I say "us" I mean *me*) had a limited understanding of what the witnesses role *should* be. I think the votes for witnesses were almost seen as a way to curry favour with people rather than protect and serve our interests in ensuring the stability and growth of steem. 

Posted using [Partiko Android](https://steemit.com/@partiko-android)
properties (22)
authorfelt.buzz
permlinkfelt-buzz-re-taskmaster4450-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t145232623z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"app":"partiko"}
created2018-10-12 14:52:33
last_update2018-10-12 14:52:33
depth2
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 14:52:33
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length425
author_reputation436,283,737,305,882
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,152,061
net_rshares0
@tcpolymath ·
$2.08
It would be nice if Steemit Inc. first put forth a statement on what they believe Steem *is*. Is Steem's future as a social media blockchain, a business-support blockchain, a tokenization-platform blockchain, some hybrid of the three? Development standards ought to be different for those different options of which direction we're headed in, and one thing HF20 has made very clear is that we don't have a clear, public notion of what that direction is. I feel like having that discussion first would be a good idea.

I tend to deduce from the lack of enthusiasm for building a quality user experience that Steemit Inc. doesn't particularly value the direct social media component at this time, despite it being used as the proof-of-concept. But I could easily be wrong about that, and it would be nice to have it spelled out directly.
👍  , , , ,
properties (23)
authortcpolymath
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t160146871z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 16:01:48
last_update2018-10-12 16:01:48
depth1
children27
last_payout2018-10-19 16:01:48
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.631 HBD
curator_payout_value0.444 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length835
author_reputation72,516,729,960,969
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,156,560
net_rshares1,594,476,037,135
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@ned · (edited)
This statement is in lots of places. Steem is the blockchain engine to support the future of users, entrepreneurs and developers of internet applications primarily with public content persistence and interactive, specialized currencies. Steemit, Inc. focuses on the blockchain roadmap that enables these constituents.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorned
permlinkre-tcpolymath-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t164143214z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 16:41:42
last_update2018-10-12 16:43:15
depth2
children19
last_payout2018-10-19 16:41:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length317
author_reputation94,449,026,656,258
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout0.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,158,725
net_rshares185,692,996,654
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@inventor16 · (edited)
$0.88
Shouldn't Steemit Inc be rebranded to reflect it's mission statement. Steemit Inc implies the main focus is on steemit.com. Also how are we supposed to elect witnesses that actually do code review when one person @freedom controls all but 3 of the top 20 witnesses. I've been calling for account based witness voting with vote decay.
👍  , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorinventor16
permlinkre-ned-re-tcpolymath-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t170956782z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["freedom"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 17:09:57
last_update2018-10-12 17:12:06
depth3
children2
last_payout2018-10-19 17:09:57
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.660 HBD
curator_payout_value0.217 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length333
author_reputation27,717,723,835,479
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,160,351
net_rshares646,540,058,426
author_curate_reward""
vote details (6)
@lextenebris ·
$0.07
You know, those words in that sequence don't actually *mean* anything, right? You have quite adroitly sidestepped every question implied and expressed, and responded by saying "it's a blockchain that can support different currencies!"

Well, yes. But that's not a vision. That's not a direction. That's the definition of a thing that already exists, and it's not the only one that exists. The important question you absolutely have not answered is, "why should we care?"

Every blockchain expects to "support the future of users," because that's what applications and services do. Yes, it's an application or service. Congratulations, you worked it out. Every public distributed blockchain supports content persistence, because that is what a blockchain does, store persistently a transaction list. That's all it does. So yes, congratulations, you worked it out. "Interactive, specialized currencies." Like Ethereum. Which already has a widely expansive support for interactive, specialized currencies. Congratulations, you worked it out.

"Steemit Inc. focuses on the blockchain roadmap that enables these constituents."

You mean "our vision is to run a blockchain which chases Ethereum?" Because that is what you just said.

I have read a lot of corporate-speak in my life. Vast amounts, in fact. More than any entity should – and the fact that you don't have a ready to go, boilerplate answer to "what's the direction the company wants to go in?" that avoids legalese and actually picks out a direction? That's terrifying.

If your answer is, "I have no idea; we're just banging on this thing like monkeys and expecting other developers to figure out what to do with it," it would be a lot more honorable and a lot simpler to just say that. Just say it! We can handle the truth. I promise, we can handle the truth.

Do I expect that to happen? No. Not even a little.

But it's nice that I get to ask the questions and point out the failures in public in a way that can't be disappeared unless the whole blockchain goes toes up.

Man, it would really be good for business to have a real answer to "what's the current vision?" Maybe someday someone will want to do that business.
👍  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorlextenebris
permlinkre-ned-re-tcpolymath-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t011053997z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"community":"steempeak","app":"steempeak"}
created2018-10-13 01:10:54
last_update2018-10-13 01:10:54
depth3
children12
last_payout2018-10-20 01:10:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.056 HBD
curator_payout_value0.018 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,181
author_reputation19,925,699,409,525
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,180,629
net_rshares55,797,137,586
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@tcpolymath ·
$0.03
That strongly suggests that most "legacy" Steem behavior will not be supported going forward. There are very few existing features of Steem that forward those goals. A development roadmap with that as the endpoint ought to start by removing the Steem rewards system wholesale, as an extremely expensive feature that none of the long-term goals actually require.

It also implies that everything anyone's building for the "first-layer" Steem right now will become obsolete through the SMT development process. 

Would definitely like to know where I'm wrong about this, because if that's your mission statement I probably shouldn't continue working on projects here.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authortcpolymath
permlinkre-ned-re-tcpolymath-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t172123130z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 17:21:24
last_update2018-10-12 17:21:24
depth3
children2
last_payout2018-10-19 17:21:24
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.026 HBD
curator_payout_value0.007 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length665
author_reputation72,516,729,960,969
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,160,950
net_rshares25,865,562,330
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@surfyogi ·
$0.02
to quote:

"from the lack of enthusiasm for building a quality user experience that Steemit Inc. doesn't particularly value the direct social media component at this time, despite it being used as the proof-of-concept"

I have said MUCH the same, MANY times, and it's disheartening to witness that there are many designs, NONE of which are really clear, as if we are evaluating many women, and only 1 can be the wife.

Due to lack of communication about the CURRENT ROAD MAP, I think it's obvious we are all not clear, even just before SteemFest3? 
I am SAD. 
Please correct me if I am wrong?!
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorsurfyogi
permlinkre-tcpolymath-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t161353830z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 16:13:54
last_update2018-10-12 16:13:54
depth2
children6
last_payout2018-10-19 16:13:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.018 HBD
curator_payout_value0.004 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length593
author_reputation31,155,045,810,316
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,157,236
net_rshares18,373,310,127
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@ned ·
Roadmap is a form of SMTs, Scaling, SMT Oracles, Voting Economics. We have been producing means to put this forward formally.
properties (22)
authorned
permlinkre-surfyogi-re-tcpolymath-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t163721241z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 16:37:21
last_update2018-10-12 16:37:21
depth3
children5
last_payout2018-10-19 16:37:21
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length125
author_reputation94,449,026,656,258
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout0.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,158,512
net_rshares0
@teamsteem ·
$6.12
[<img src="https://i.imgur.com/Y37Y104.png">](http://www.steemreports.com/witness-voters/)

Because we don't know if @pumpkin / @freedom is owned by Steemit, there was considerable pressure for witnesses to go along with Steemit Inc and this hardfork. 

This has been the case for many HF now. The majority of the top witness would drop out of top 20 if they were to lose @pumpkin's vote.  @pumpkin's influence goes beyond the top 20 witnesses. 

@blocktrades also has a substantial influence on the witness ranking. He only votes for 5 witnesses at the moment.  @blocktrades' proximity to Steemit Inc also creates pressure for top witnesses to get in line with Steemit Inc. 

These pressures, although not ultimate factors, have created with this HF and in the past, situations where there are high risks to go against Steemit Inc's HF (and potentially lose @pumpkin or @blocktrades' vote) with very low possibility of reward, (delaying, stopping an hardfork **while proving it was justified**). 

This is one aspect of Steem which would benefit from more public exposure.
👍  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorteamsteem
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t052057847z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["pumpkin","freedom","blocktrades"],"image":["https://i.imgur.com/Y37Y104.png"],"links":["http://www.steemreports.com/witness-voters/"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-15 05:20:57
last_update2018-10-15 05:20:57
depth1
children27
last_payout2018-10-22 05:20:57
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value6.076 HBD
curator_payout_value0.045 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,073
author_reputation284,804,541,406,803
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,318,547
net_rshares6,209,770,542,025
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@ned ·
This is quite clear FUD and an example better positioned in an argument against DPoS on a theoretical basis. 

Because the facts are clear: Freedom is not owned by Steemit Inc nor it’s employees. It’s someone or some people in the ecosystem. This person has a right to vote with their stake. Blocktrades is the same. 

Beyond that, Top 20 Witnesses were expressly requested to Not Upgrade by Steemit Inc if the code did not meet their standards.

If the witness’ Standards aren’t high enough — that is on the Stakeholders, such as You, of the ecosystem to demand change in.
properties (22)
authorned
permlinkre-teamsteem-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t180226734z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-15 18:02:27
last_update2018-10-15 18:02:27
depth2
children26
last_payout2018-10-22 18:02:27
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length573
author_reputation94,449,026,656,258
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout0.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,359,114
net_rshares0
@teamsteem · (edited)
> Freedom is not owned by Steemit Inc nor it’s employees. 

These are unsubstantiated facts. If you have proofs of who @freedom is, then feel free to reveal them publicly. As of now, it remains unknown who @freedom is and thus my points remain valid.
properties (22)
authorteamsteem
permlinkre-ned-re-teamsteem-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181015t195859890z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["freedom"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-15 19:59:00
last_update2018-10-15 20:01:03
depth3
children25
last_payout2018-10-22 19:59:00
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length250
author_reputation284,804,541,406,803
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,364,802
net_rshares0
@wenamebooster ·
Steemit Like Bitcoin? If This Not Bitcoin So This Very Good If This Yes This Is Like Bitcoin So Very Very Good For Earning! Keep Earning From This Site Some People  Is Earn  $1K Per Week!! Its Very Good For Earn But Keep Post Best Post On This Site & Keep Sharing With You friends
properties (22)
authorwenamebooster
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t080637547z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-13 08:06:39
last_update2018-10-13 08:06:39
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-20 08:06:39
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length280
author_reputation564,628,963
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,197,393
net_rshares0
@wizardave ·
$0.06
# [I unvoted all top 20 witnesses in protest of how HF20 went](https://steemit.com/@wizardave/i-unvoted-all-top-20-witnesses-in-protest-of-how-hf20-went)
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorwizardave
permlinkre-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t172927352z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/@wizardave/i-unvoted-all-top-20-witnesses-in-protest-of-how-hf20-went"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-12 17:29:27
last_update2018-10-12 17:29:27
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-10-19 17:29:27
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.048 HBD
curator_payout_value0.015 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length153
author_reputation8,924,945,173,015
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,161,376
net_rshares48,737,982,564
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)