Well I disagree that Hive is democratic. Technocratic is my view. The ones who play directly with the code essentially rule. Witnesses (20) are like the Royal Family in a sense. The HDF like the central bank that honours certain 'corporations.' the rest... "pay your taxes peasants."
I liked what your said in another comment though, that the voting should be all equal. So that certain things would really get honest governance and everyone feel and be part of the system. Yes investors should get their greater returns, that's naturally how money works but the big issue is that those who aren't able to put a stack in, which (is the overwhelming majority) are really just nobodies.
They are THE VALUE though (as communities, which we all agree) but then they aren't rewarded accordingly. Exploited actually. Yet some, like Venezuelans, literally have no other option so I think even if they see it, they aren't going to make noise about it. There is some good progress in changing that though so maybe the acidboy will rise as a champion of the people.
Because as is, I see it as not just hurting them people committed to communities (in short and long run) but also hurting the system. Because I'm sure I'm not the only one that sees it. So if others see it to then many investors would not proceed to back this Blockchain if they come to realise that there's "secret deals" that actually are how things work here. Or that only certain people matter. Ethics is actually becoming a prominent factor in the regular corporate world so it will also play a large role in these emerging digital systems.
Imo, Hive (even steemit) could have long ago made global impact by taking real notice and care of the "poor people" that it was attracting as far back as 2017. Yet it (the "upper" class) just saw those people as "they're not bringing money so ignore them as they chase pennies" and there was even hateful retribution to those that didn't know too well that asking to be followed for instance is considered spamming. Themarkymark even gets off on them existing on his 'bad people I punish list' and is cold hearted when they ask for some leniency. He has kids too so I wonder who he really is as a person, as a dad etc.. anyway that's almost a personal attack but I see that guy as somewhat of a sociopath.
Overall, I'm no one here in regards to position. I speak the truth though. This thing of Hive, of inner circles, and selective success is why I personally never put money in and why I believe many walked away too. So in the future, that might be why it never grows. Even if it's guaranteed years yet of existence there might not be the mass onboarding or investor attraction that so many hope for and run cumbersome initiatives for. A good system shouldn't even need to be pimped so hard.
SMT might always be the 'Spiritu Santos' that never eventuated. The coming of Christ that never happened. Maybe blocktrades is Jesus? He's obviously making good money from this but he seems very passionate about it too and has hinted that there's much that he believes could be done with it. So who knows!
Anyway regardless, this is one of the most interesting blockchains to watch. It's on the brink of either that much needed expansion or it's in another demise. The fascinating thing is then that, it all depends on who you talk to and what it is that they value to see what perspective is accurate.
I prefer the term oligarchy that you used in a prior comment to the comparison to a Royal Family. One is gained via inheritance, and the other usually comes from hard work to achieve the position. Even then, oligarchy is not my favorites either since the implication is usually collusion to manipulate prices and take advantage of others. I don’t think that applies to the top witnesses who I view as being very diverse in character and having a high level of ethics which motivates them to work towards common goals that benefit the majority rather than their minority. After seeing all that they have done (or haven’t done) and the way they’ve gone about it, that’s the impression I have anyway.
The current unequal voting is somewhat of an anomaly in my opinion since it is the result of their attempt to curb self-voting of trash by a select group of whales, among other things. What we have now is certainly better than before, we don’t see $900 rewards on trash posts anymore, and many more content creators are benefiting as a result. However, there is more to do. We need to create more incentives for people to vote comments, for example, and that, in turn, is something that would be very beneficial to the rank and file, giving them power and recognition they deserve.
No doubt about it, all the shortcomings hurt the system as a whole, but this is a work in progress and the responsibility for all further improvements rests solely upon our shoulders. A democracy it isn’t, but it’s resembling a republic more and more every day. We all have to play our respective parts and do the best we can do to constructively contribute to making things better. And they will get better. You mentioned another comment of mine talking about vote equality. I imagine that was in the thread of @blocktrades most recent post, which is a great example of a whale/witness fully engaged with the community, listening, responding, and in this case shelving the idea for now after having reviewed the feedback. 365 comments as of this writing! That’s a fairly encouraging ‘conversation’ for anyone looking for evidence of democratic values being practiced.
Whenever we go back to pre-HIVE days, I lose, because there is nothing I can say that is positive about STEEM. As I’ve said before, the only thing remotely positive there was the hope that someday things would change … and they never did. As I’ve also said before, the hostile takeover was a blessing in disguise since it got all the procrastinators, all the fearful of change, and all the Kool-Aid drinkers to take finally take action, and things have worked out pretty well. Nevertheless, as I’ve said, there’s much more to do, but least now we’re freed of the previous shackles and able to move forward building on a respectable base that honors and adheres to the core crypto ethos, and that’s nothing to sneeze at.
To give you an even better idea of where I’m coming from on this, I don’t like downvotes at all. That’s a battle for another day, but I consider them to be destructive, and I don’t like destructiveness. Not upvoting is good enough to express that you don’t like something. Why then add something that not only destroys, but also creates animosity and confrontation as well? Not a good thing in my opinion. It’s always better to act in positive: reward what you like and don’t reward what you don’t like. Simple. Who’s really interested in playing God anyway? To be fair, I should say that the reasoning behind downvoting was to combat the $900 reward shit post … but I’m sure we can find other ways to do that in the future.
All in all, I agree with you that this is one of the most interesting projects in crypto, so much so that I decided to come back after seeing all the positive developments we have seen over the last few months. You know, I left Steemit in the summer of 2018 – for many reasons, from personal stagnation there to all the negatives overhanging the community, but I never sold anything that I was still hanging on to, as I refuse to sell low and my analysis was that even though things were bad, they weren’t so bad that another pump wouldn’t happen someday, and as luck would have it, I got the split, sold the STEEM and bought HIVE (at basically a 1:1 exchange) and also added a bit more from a couple of other disappointments that I dumped. So I guess you could say I’ve come back committed, but that’s because I think it’s an incredible opportunity, especially at today’s prices, and more so still if you’re taking an active role in the development process (even if that role is relatively small).
From a purely speculative investment point of view, there aren’t many out there that have as good of a risk/reward, and since this is a long term investment/project, for me anyway, it’s a no-brainer to power up, and I recommend doing so for anyone who buys HIVE. Why just buy and hold when you can put it to work, make yourself heard, and play a positive roll in the development of that investment? Where else do you have that opportunity?
But remember, the real opportunity is in the building. Once it’s all built and working perfectly, the investment part of the equation won’t exist!
I like your belief man because you don't revert to cultish lingo, that which toastmaster4000 refers to as "Hive maximalist". You are very honest about everything. I agree with you completely on the comment rewards. If blockhead is thinking of getting rid of curation rewards then they should at least trial a strictly social engagement system. Engage is already that but somewhat of a 'limp dick' thing, so to give real hard rewards would drive community exponentially.
I actually fell in love (for a short period) with steemit on that very concept way back. I used to read suesa posts and found them very interesting so I would leave thoughtful comments. Then blockhead rewarded me once $10 and I thought "damn this shit has potential!" Little did I know though that it was just automated voting lol... and worse still, once he launched the service of blocktrades he didn't give out any more lollies. Even suesa got ditched like a beaten piñata!
Regardless though, I've always maintained that comment engagements mentality, I think people appreciate when you actually read their posts and reflect on the value they put in. So that's why I critique the lack of chat as a major flaw of Hive.
So yeah like you said, there's work to do still but then the other thing I still see as a negative is that the coders here are all about "if I build it, I need payment NOW!" either through HDF our by taking a beneficiary percentage of those that use those services.
I see that as broken because if its about the long game and those buying in now won't get rewards until Hive succeeds (price pump) then coders too must weather the hard times and accept rations until the thing gets that growth and exposure. That's just my view though, people obviously commit full time so they have overheads.
Anyway... all in all.
All we can do is let time tell the tale.
Life's rough. At least I was able to pay for my MSc tuition fees with what I got before I was dropped. Can't complain too much.
Well that's good then. That's also a feel good story that could be multiplied many times over too. That's the thing I thought steemit could have become. A "hope coin/token/community" for many. Which would most definitely have given this blockchain (as steemit and Hive) a global brand that could really be marketed.
Back then it was pointless though because people couldn't even get an email back on the sign up. Anyway it's not done and dusted, maybe in the future development will allow those things to materialise.
Things have changed:
https://hive.blog/hive/@cryptographic/hive-how-exactly-did-that-happen
It's a tabula rasa now with all the potential the original idea held. "Back then" is ancient history; now we need to focus on the future, little by little, and maybe we can even convince the devs that some delayed gratification can be an interesting 'option'. 🙂
!ENGAGE 50
ENGAGEtokens.