最近币圈的一个事情闹的动静还是不小的，就是Tron收购Steemit这个事情。这个事情现在还没有结束，我觉得还是要引起想在区块链这个领域做事情的公司关注的。
对于这个事情的大概前因后果，在这篇大佬写的文章里介绍了，这里就不再细说。大概就是Steemit公司自己经营问题导致的一些历史遗留问题，在Tron收购的时候，Ned（Steemit公司CEO）并没有交代清楚，导致Tron的老板孙宇晨在做一些宣传事项的时候，触动了Steem社区的利益集团的神经，因为沟通不是很有效，社区直接封锁了原Steemit公司的账号的资金使用权利，孙老板联合交易所又来了一个猛烈的反击，最终导致对战开始。
这次的事件，我觉得对于想要基于区块链进行创业的团队来说，很具有教科书式的启发。那就是在区块链上，如果引入了社区治理（比如像DPOS这样的），如何才能划清楚公司和社区的责任和财产，如何才能保护好自己？
在现实生活中，国家都有相对比较完备的民事法律体系，来帮助有争端的人来解决争端。那么在区块链世界，用什么来保护呢？
我曾在社区跟另外一个人讨论过，关于口头承诺在区块链世界到底作不作数的问题。我个人倾向于这种东西是不作数的。区块链从比特币开始，我觉得它的本质就是要用客观的方法去解决客观的问题，不要在客观问题的执行上，让人参与。
那么什么是客观的方法呢？代码！代码就是区块链的一切，代码就是区块链里的法律。只有在代码产生前的所有讨论，才是人可以去主观影响的。一旦多数人达成了共识，就应该用代码的方式去落实共识。当遇到纠纷的时候，就是要靠已执行在链上的代码，来保证所有人的权益。这才应该是区块链的意义。
就像这次的事件，核心就是币权归属的问题。Ned在跟社区协商中，对于这些资产达成了共识，但是仅是发布视频和文件在区块链上而已，而实际的币权操作还是他自己说了算的，并没有代码去限制。
也就说，Ned完全可以撕破脸去做他想做的事情，最多就是社区声讨吧。但是对于一个可以最后撕破脸的人来说，你觉得他会怕声讨吗？不过Ned并没有去撕破脸，而是成功套现把锅甩给了之前不明真相的孙老板。
如果一开始，共识达成后，就直接落实为代码，就不会有现在这难解的扣了。
所以说，想要在区块链方向上创业的公司，请一定要把该做的事情做好，哪怕那个时候做起来觉得繁琐没必要，也一定要做。多一份保障就是对自己财产多一份保障。
下面是我针对这次事件的其他吐槽（先声明我不是给孙老板站队）。
这个资产问题在Steem链正式运营的时候就存在，到现在至少两年的时间了，社区的领袖们（头部见证人们）都去做什么了，就跟隐形了一样。为什么在孙老板收购Steemit后，你们却都跳出来了，还直接就封锁了Steemit公司账号的币权？
假如说社区的人多数都认可Ned发表的口头承诺，所以没有用代码限制公司的账号币权，那么为什么孙老板收购Steemit公司后，你们就不再认可Ned的口头承诺了呢？因为这个承诺理论上讲是跟着收购这个事情，一并都算到了新的老板头上的。是不是有点双标了？虽然人都有双标的特性，但是目前的这种双标真的是对整个社区负责吗？我看其实是在对你们自己的自身利益负责吧？
再要说的就是区块链的制度之争。我想说的是，没有什么制度是完美的，关键还是要看参与制度的人。这句话什么意思？就是说，没有绝对的去中心化，只有相对的去中心化。即使是POW制度下的公链，只要钱多，依然可以中心化，所以关键还是要看公链的治理团队的水平。
最后，就是我觉得，如果在整个收购过程中，Ned并没有写明这些细节，比如之前做过的承诺之类的，其实孙老板可以去起诉Ned了。花了泡澡堂子的钱，结果进门却被强制只能泡个脚，这买卖肯定是不能这么干，这瘪肯定不会就这么吃的。我觉得这应该是孙老板联合交易所发起反击前的内心写照了吧。
ET碎碎念，每周一，晚六点一刻更新，欢迎订阅
欢迎使用 SteemEditor 来编写文章，获取 @steemeditor.bot 的点赞！
感谢你的阅读，我是中文区见证人之一，欢迎通过 SteemConnect 来给我投票，或者打开 https://steemitwallet.com/~witnesses 页面，输入 ety001 进行投票。
中文区的见证人目前有：
支持一下他们（按字母顺序），一人可以有30票：
Thank you for reading. I'm a witness. I would really appreciate your witness vote! You can vote by SteemConnect. Or open https://steemitwallet.com/~witnesses page, input ety001 to vote.
We were hoping that JS will recognize those Ned's promises, but all the signs coming from various communication channels was making us to believe that the whole platform is in danger (more on that in @pfunk's post).
And yes, you are absolutely right, we should enforce those promises in the code (actually at the time of HF14 such code was developed for solely that purpose:
decline_voting_rights, however it wasn't ever used).So after yet another failure of Ned that resulted in Steemit Inc. crisis by the end of 2018, we discussed that once again, unfortunately at that time there were no consensus on enforcing it via code and community decided to trust his words once again, which as we all see now was a grave mistake. And I mean it. It caused the end of Steem as we know it.
I'm very appreciate that you use translator to read my post. My English is not well so I use my mother language writing this post to post my opinion. You're the star in the community and I also voted you long time ago. I think your contribution is very important for the community.
In this incident, the division of power between the company and the community was very chaotic. And I don't think Justin Sun known Ned's promises before he bought Steem Inc. But this is only my guess, because we do not know the content of the purchase contract and the purchase process.
Justin is a very clever business man. He is good at using the focus news on media to improve his assets' value. The words he spoken is just words in most time. His purpose is to make investors pay attention to Tron. He said he will move Steem to Tron. I think that just was words. His purpose is to tell investors Tron will have a good social media and Steem is that social media.
As for whether to do so, I think the community can talk about it with Justin. But the community worried about Justin is the second Ned and the top witnesses locked the Steem Inc. 's coins immediately. I think this is a very very bad choice. Locked coins is like to use nuclear weapon in the real world. It should be the last choice not the first choice. In Justin's meaning, the community locked his money. He thinks he used the real money bought the whole Steem Inc's asset including the coins which have been locked.
I run the version 0.22.5 to support that community should unlock the coins first and then talk about the future of Steem with Justin.
I think the only possible solution at present is to let Ned return the equivalent of the value of the locked coin to Justin, and then in version 0.22.6, directly make the locked coin to the community control by coding.
In the blockchain world, code is everything and human promise is shit. If the human promise is useful, we don't need law and even the blockchain.
Yes, I quite agree with you about that
We actually know pretty a lot about the purchase (like that price was much much lower than the market value of assets themselves - so he had to know at least to some extent that those resources have strings attached) and we also tried to communicate with him and/or his representatives.
Trust me, we tried talking for over a month now, and it always ended up the same: we hear some promises and in the meantime we see more and more hostile actions. Since the time of the incident with exchanges (note that funds of Steemians were abused for impacting the governance and that locked with withdrawals suspended) none of the witnesses is blocking anything, and yet we experience even more hostile actions and simple lies.
I was really hoping for a win-win scenario with Justin Sun, especially that with his robustness, contacts with business world and 点石成金 (?) he could do a lot of good for Steem and many people actually was pointing that out - many, many months ago -that he would be much better for Steem than Ned ("Be careful what you wish fork").
After a whole month of hard work and trying to find some way of cooperation, a month of lies and hostile actions from him and his team, I no longer think that he care about Steem. I think the best way is to abandon our hopes for Steem friendly Justin Sun and redirect our hopes to what never failed us: our community.
Steem is not a place, not even a name. We can do wonders, and we don't need Sun for that :-)
As I said, the top witnesses made a very wrong and dangerous choice. Lock someone's asset is not the spirit of the blockchain. Lock asset is a nuclear weapon. Another nuclear weapon is exchange's vote. The two weapons should be the last choices but the top witnesses used one. So I think the top witnesses upgrade the conflict to the war.
I absolutely persist my opinion that people's asset cannot be locked and that's why I choose 0.22.5.
And I also confuse why the top witnesses did not lock coins when Ned was there? Is this a double standard way?
Respect is mutual. If Ned was the former leader of the Steem, do you think lock asset is a respect way to welcome a new leader?
If lock someone's asset becomes the normal state of the community, I don't think there is any need to explore the future of the community. What's to talk about after the assets have been confiscated? :-)
No, it was a mistake that we didn't want repeat again.
It was more of a delay than lock, to ensure that assets in question wont be abused past the unrecoverable point. Unfortunately there was high probability of doing so (abuse of non-voting stake by same party on TRON network).
No. Need was former leader of Steemit Inc. Steem is more than that. Steem has no leader.
While I have a lot of bad opinions now about Justin Sun, I also think that he is also a victim of a situation created by Ned, although, as mentioned already, I'm pretty convinced (due to value of contract) that Sun knew about problems, yet, didn't cared to talk and pushing changes without respect to governance rules (initial press releases about token swap through Poloniex, etc).
It was least disruptive way of dealing with existential danger of the platform.
@tipu curate
!shop
Posted using Partiko Android
Upvoted 👌 (Mana: 15/20 - need recharge?)
你好鸭，ety001!
@annepink给您叫了一份外卖！
由 @wongshiying 老王 迎着飓风 跑着步 给您送来
上海人的回忆雪糕
吃饱了吗？跟我猜拳吧！ 石头，剪刀，布～
如果您对我的服务满意，请不要吝啬您的点赞～
@onepagex