oops
T
4 years ago in #steemit by abitcoinskeptic (74)
$8.10
- Past Payouts $8.10
- - Author $4.75
- - Curators $3.34
211 votes
- buildawhale: $1.92
- themarkymark: $0.75
- xpilar: $0.50
- friendlystranger: $0.45
- znnuksfe: $0.40
- steemflagrewards: $0.34
- nuthman: $0.30
- nickyhavey: $0.27
- stoodkev: $0.18
- afiqsejuk: $0.14
- streetstyle: $0.13
- helpie: $0.12
- eonwarped: $0.10
- simplymike: $0.10
- sj-jeong: $0.09
- vikisecrets: $0.09
- ipromote: $0.08
- roleerob: $0.08
- suonghuynh: $0.08
- livinguktaiwan: $0.08
- and 191 more
I'm happy to be at next meeting as a crypto lawyer with plenty of litigation experience. See www.jpbliberty.com & @jpbliberty Steem blog for details.
Yup, we need legal analysis and support. I'm also happy to review from my experience. I think anonymous actors should be sidelined for now.
Random opinion needs scrutiny.
Justin didn't remove his claim that they are malicious hackers. I don't agree with Justin. But some witnesses saw that as a top priority. It is telling of their concerns for the community and expertise in these matters. If it turns out that stake was not private property, which I believe, Justin should retract his statement. If it is private property, well thankfully no serious damage was done by the witnesses since funds were only frozen. It was Justin's decision to call in the exchanges as heavy artillery to help him which seems to be his potential blunder given the events since then.
This has to one of the most lucid, clear analyses I've seen of the events of the last couple of weeks. I too, listened to that recording and was appalled at (although I understood) the level of emotion. Only one witness (two at a stretch) stood out for me as being relatively calm and rational.
Sun is in it to win it. Whatever that might mean. He may (or may not) have had his minions do the depth of due diligence needed. It doesn't matter. He's claimed ignorance of certain things. Whether it's strategic or genuine, I don't know. Either way, it doesn't matter. This whole thing will run its course and if the posturing and (well, I won't say what I was going to say, but I'm sure you catch my drift), doesn't come to an end, Steemit as we know it will die. After that, what happens to the Steem, the Dapps and the community?
That is the question. And clearly there are a lot of people who care. One doesn't. He's just in it to make money. He said so.
over and out
For now.
He dropped liquid Steem to all time lows, worst case scenario it pumps and he dumps on us— then goes bye bye
Posted using Partiko iOS
As you say.
Thanks. Glad someone else saw the clear message.
I'm impressed with our community but not with some of our leaders.
This isn't a game. I don't feel like speculating on what will happen. But I imagine if we don't get out act together, Justin will have his way with us.
Did Steem Witnesses even send one?
We need evidence. I can write a letter if I have references.
Agreed. And although I'm in Operation Ostrich and not posting about this, I am most certainly keeping an eye on things. It is also why, having removed my witness votes from those who were applying the soft fork, I voted for them again. It was patently obvious from that discussion that there was inadequate information and the communication abysmal.
It is a case, in the community of the enemy of the enemy is my friend. However, as you say, this is serious and folk need to recognise where their strenghth are and where they have deficits, to find people - like you - to fill the gaps.
I hope that they do ask for your help. Thank you for offering.
Basically— lol that’s what he said “I don’t know none of this until you guys froze my stake. basically”
Ned is in trouble for sure.
Sun said exactly what I’ve been telling everyone— he’s only here to make money and doesn’t really care about the community etc.
I believe it was a bit unprofessional to ask when he plans to exit since we can all wait for the pump. But I’m now worried since it’s obvious he wants out and legally I think he Can dump on us— after 13 weeks of course. Regulators will likely take his side to that degree if he decides to sell what he purchased on the open market. That currently is my only fear, the fact that he possibly went from classic long-term pump plan to straight up pump and dump this ‘B’ 😒
It’s not over that’s for sure, the witnesses need to hold strong and we need to onboard more troops. The crypto community will eventually see Steem has the strongest decentralized blockchain governance structure and likely jump onboard. Then we win.
Also, I think they accidentally fixed our over supply issue; wouldn’t be surprised if Steem starts mooning with the sudden tank in liquid supply on exchanges.
I also think we can still win.
But instead of on the blockchain, lets freeze it in the courts, lol.
We have the correct and righteous legal opinion. I think he will help us if we take him seriously.
If he wants to sue Ned for misleading him, cool, let's help him. We don't know what Ned told him. So let's trust him and help him discover the truth.
Yeah, if we combine forces against the real enemy (Ned 😅) there’s a huge up side to this whole debacle
Best way to find unity: a common enemy
Posted using Partiko iOS
Hmmm... SteemFundation you say .... lawyers .. legality and paper things.... something to think about.... #witnesses
Some acknowledge Justin is also taking a multifaceted approach.
I think we can all agree legal and civil approaches are wise.
I do see others recognizing the importance of this route.
Thanks for your comment.
Thing is, is writing a blog online from steemit saying "we won't use the stake for x,y,z" legally binding? I'm not a legal person but I highly doubt it. Just sounds like it would make the source of whoever wrote it untrustworthy if they went against their word more than anything.
Plans change, steemit is a private company so whatever business was discussed was likely to be signed with an NDA or confidentiality agreement (like with any company contract that's signed... With a pen and paper) between Justin and Ned.
My personal view is that if there's no signed legally binding document proving that the stake would not be used then where's the footing/foundation for a legal case? And then, even if there was, who would Mr Scott even sign that contract with?? It doesn't add up in my mind but I'm observing from afar.
I was not in support of the soft fork, it sounded sketchy and had a feeling it would come back round. I did proxy witness vote for about an hour or two but I am abstaining from voting again. I don't really trust anyone at the moment!
It's going to have to be some meeting next time to fill me with any confidence. Viewing from the horizon with binoculars.
Well, I just read this article from crypto briefing and that got me setting theycallmedan as a witness vote proxy
https://cryptobriefing.com/steem-rallies-against-justin-suns-power-grab/
In addition to the above screenshot, see the screenshots below. The chain never lies!
The issue is it doesn't say how decentralization will occur. Selling openly on the market can decentralize.
They were selling on the market before this happened. Now I fear they will dump it quickly.
@abitcoinskeptic More people need to hear this. Thanks for offering another way out of this quagmire.
Resteemed.
Yup trolling justin and 'hacking' him again won't work.
This is a side topic, but I have a strong suspicion that Ned also got suckered into buying/trading for a whole bunch of TRON as part of the multi-million dollar deal. Many big organizations will offer to buy something from another organization if they agree to buy something back, because to them it is viewed as a free exchange that costs nothing.
Makes sense. If Ned bought some Tron token with his own money and stake that's cool. If he traded Tron for Steemit stake, that's wrong.
This is a great piece of opinion on what happened in the meeting yesterday. I couldn't agree more. I've seen a lot of rage and insulting expressions that goes beyond community values, good dialog and even cultural respect, as for example @therealwolf expresses concerns here: (v0.22.333). Different perspectives are always susceptible to find common ground if you can listen to each other. It's needed a good negotiator on behalf of the awesome work that many have done in this blockchain!!
It won't be bad some of Ned's opinions in all of this!
Send you best vibes for this interesting times, @aBitcoinSkeptic, a pleasure to visit your blog!!
Thanks glad you liked it.
Justin had the advantage of a single mind and a coherent professional approach. But he sort of threw that away on social media, and especially his recent steem post.
In the end we get to know more about our witnesses and when this is iver we will be much stronger and more knowledgeable as a community.
Many news continue unfolding! But you are right, a stronger community will rise from all this!!
Big hug and good vibes, @aBitcoinSkeptic, I keep in touch with all your updates!!
Hello!
This post has been manually curated, resteemed
and gifted with some virtually delicious cake
from the @helpiecake curation team!
Much love to you from all of us at @helpie!
Keep up the great work!
Manually curated by @priyanarc.
@helpie is a Community Witness.
Thank you for cake. I was hungry.
While I don't have time to watch this @abitcoinskeptic ...
... of this, there can be no doubt. My initial conclusion upon reading about the Soft Fork 22.2 decision ... Much better intentions and far better communication was needed ...
Exactly. The point I made in my own post on this mess. Trust was almost irreversibly damaged and Sun is now in what will likely be proven to be an unalterably adversarial position. Without a legally binding position, which is provable in a court of law, I seriously questioned the wisdom of the Soft Fork 22.2 decision.
Without that, especially this side (wrong time to be figuring out whether or not anything can be proven in a legally binding manner ...) of the "malicious actions" taken, the Steem blockchain better have an outstanding negotiator of some sort of profitable "peace" offering to Sun. And the longer this is drawn out and the uglier it gets, likely the more profitable it will have to be ...
An old thought, from way back earlier in my career - "Don't take someone on, unless you are sure you can take them out ..." Plenty of "battle scars" and "war stories" to back up why I would say this ...
I don't blame youbfor not watching the video. There are plenty of opinions on it. I really hope they can see eye to eye, but it is unlikely.
I think the lack of legal clarity is why they are trying to win with votes and witnesses. If that Steem is secure, who can really police the blockchain? The witnesses come from a lot of different countries and many of the voters are unknown.
To be honest I think we had no choice but to take on Justin. Sure the approach could have been better and even if we win, there will be internal damage. I do see some community building and insights gained. But there are people doing things that will be difficult to forget.
In anycase, I like decentralization and I'm not excited about some proposals offered to move forward like removing all downvotes a solutely, or a 3~7 days power down.
Perhaps @abitcoinskeptic ...
... but unless someone could prove his bad intentions, which I have never seen, it would have been far more prudent to lead with trust, however skeptical anyone might have been. Take the high road. Let him take the first "hostile actions" and respond accordingly, based on unmistakably and provably clear intent ...
As it is (again, unless someone has proof otherwise ...), all that was offered as "cover" for the decision made was suspicion, possibilities, etc. Thinking you're going to "pull out a gun," aim it at your "partner," with whom you then expect to reach a mutually beneficial agreement strikes me as foolish ...
Too late now. Here we are ...
Yep. The least expensive cost for any transaction is one based upon trust. If there is a deficit in trust or it is absent altogether, then the transaction cost goes up. This one has already been expensive. The cost is still increasing ...
It's definitely a case of this
Another way of looking at this like when a local mining company buys a mountain you like to hike on to build a mine. Steemit was our mountain. Tron may legally own it and have permission to mine. Now we cannot go to the mountain anymore and mining is very likely to pollute the community.
This is sort of what I mean by saying a clash was inevitable. Especially given his persona. It reminds me of what I read about the Pinkerton gang and early 19th century strikes (even though they were more justified and actually abused). We are jumping the gun here, but it is social media where gun-jumping is the norm.
Thank you for sharing your opinion.
Thank you for providing a very lucid and rational perspective @abitcoinskeptic, I think we really need more like this and less petty infighting.
I recognize the underlying dynamic here... in a different life, I worked in the Usability and Human Factors department at a Fortune 500 computer OEM. Usability was pretty much the "most hated" people in the middle who got to deal with developers and their egos on one side, and Corporate/Marketing on the other... telling each side why their passions and ideas don't function in the real world. (And then largely being ignored, till after a disaster when someone would stop into the lab and say "Why didn't you TELL us...!?!?!?!")
Well, we did. You ignored us.
But I digress.
I wrote a rather long comment on @aggroed's recent post... you can read it here, if you care:
https://steemit.com/steem/@aggroed/my-response-to-justin#@denmarkguy/q6w1gn
The TL;DR summary is that we don't know — and may never know — what Ned
failed todisclosed to Justin in his hurry to get out the door. Chances are good Justin simply didn't know he was buying "encumbered" property, because it was not formally written anywhere that it was encumbered, and Ned didn't volunteer the fact, knowing that it might block his exit strategy.We need to dredge up whatever hard evidence we can find of the intended use of the ninja mined Steem. Is there enough there to suggest an implied contractual agreement? Failing that, is there a sufficient trail of "use examples" vis-a-vis the ninja mine to create a trail of evidence that suggests a strong precedent of the intended use?
And then perhaps propose that a NEW account (perhaps "SteemDevelopmentFund") be created and some/all of the ninja mined Steem be agreed to be placed in that account, which will then be hard coded as a "special purpose" account (similar, but different from the "null" account) that EXPLICITLY can only be used for certain purposes. I could be "non-voting," distributions/use would be contingent on "X" ratio of witness support; distributions above a certain amount contingent on witness approval AND approval through an SPS-like community vote... lots of possibilities.
It may be that it is agreed that Justin gets to personally keep some of the ninja mined Steem, who knows?
And I really like the idea of someone like @apshamilton being part of a negotiating team. I hate to say it, but most developers don't have great business skills, negotiation skills and dare I say it? Social skills.
I'm sure a lot of people have similar experiences being a mediator between 2 completely different ways of thinking. I worked in an IT company, but that wasn't my role. I definitely don't envy you.
If I had to guess, Ned disclosed a lot to Justin in terms of the legal sale of a US corporation. As for Steem, that's anyone's guess. But I would hope Justin can pay someone to do his research. I'm sure they found lots of examples of the ninja stake. It would destroy their current narrative if they admitted otherwise. But you are right, purely speculation on my behalf and we may never know (I knew it wasn't Steemit's stake my first month here but I wasn't trying to buy it).
I do like the idea of a NEW account. This will obviously need to wait until Justin is ready to face the fact that few on Steem think the Steem belongs to him (I can't bring myself to agree with both Justin and Ned). In my mind, such an account would function as the current proposal system but only to give out delegations (people make a proposal for purpose/period and amount accounts vote, Justin can perhaps veto under certain conditions). Further, it would release this to Justin to sell slowly over time and perhaps in larger chunks if the witnesses agree things have been done (ex. not SMT cause those are done, but atomic swaps or marketing goals, etc).
I completely agree not all the witnesses have business skills, but as I listen to more of their discussions with Steem, I realize some do. Apshamilton would be a good person to have in at least one discussion. His opinions on the matter seem to be on point and he knows how to have a discussion with opposing parties.