create account

RE: Steem Governance is Multiparty by tarazkp

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com

Viewing a response to: @andrarchy/re-tarazkp-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181012t151657841z

· @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_reputation5,918,346,331,731,837
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,155,551
net_rshares0
@gadrian ·
$0.02
Hmm, in a sense I get you Taraz. It's complicated to track down the platforms of many witness candidates you'd evaluate for voting. And certainly it would be even more difficult for people who barely know what witnesses are, if they will be interested at all. How would we convince them to take time and evaluate every witness they vote for at length? That's nearly impossible.

Adhering to common standards may simplify things. But Steem governance will resemble more and more with real life political arena, and it seems many want to go as far from those models as possible. We'd just give birth to parties and doctrines this way.
👍  
properties (23)
authorgadrian
permlinkre-tarazkp-re-andrarchy-re-tarazkp-re-steemitblog-steem-governance-is-multiparty-20181013t100952911z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-10-13 10:09:54
last_update2018-10-13 10:09:54
depth4
children0
last_payout2018-10-20 10:09:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.018 HBD
curator_payout_value0.005 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length632
author_reputation644,682,445,183,305
root_title"Steem Governance is Multiparty"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id73,202,008
net_rshares18,236,211,356
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)