You are viewing a single comment's thread from:


in #dpoll2 years ago

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

I think this project ideology is closest to my own, The question asked is who would I show support to. Supporting myself holds too much bias. I know it can succeed too. Of the other 4 proposals , I would support Incubator 1st.


Why aren't you voting for yourself as well?

and why am I not using all the accounts I have control over to vote too?

Cause it would make no difference, Even the blind can do Mathematics. Capping the vote at 250K to make the voting so called fair is a joke, when the cap is based on 1 Million user base and the active user base is 10K. The majority of the voting from the lower accounts is gone, The voting from all the large accounts is still present. Everything seems designed for an already chosen party to vote. The project to be selected to win will be the one made by those who were asked to be overseer's of the selection process. Everything screams in house, cloak and dagger.

A pyramid is being set up to control the foundation, A pyramid that feeds the top or private industry not the chain.

My own goals have been reached by expanding those that have heard about the concept I have proposed for over 1 year now.

Speaking of shit, I took a dump in your wallet! Take a trip to the bathroom to claim your worthless SHIT!

actually the 250k cap is on SP held. Reducing the influence of the higher stake holders spreads the influence out to more of the community. The number of accounts held on the platform is irrelevant.

I have been watching the difference in rankings between full stake and capped stake. There is a difference and it doesn't work in any particular groups favour except as influenced by the incoming votes. The impact has moved back and forth as the votes have come in.

on SP held is also including non active accounts.

I see. I don't know if 250k was the right level to cut it off, but its an interesting mechanism: stake 'to a certain point'.

I decided to vote with some of my accounts, even though it might not change the outcome. Voting is more of a social orient that a results orient for me anyway - at least 'in real life' I'm used to voting for the loveable losers.

You can actually compare the numbers through the filters on dpoll and no matter if you look at account voting (one vote per account), pure stake or the cap we focused on.. the results currently are the same.

The end result will be interesting to compare and use as an example for possible future voting and decision making etc. But currently, popular vote (one account/one vote) and the stake options are showing pretty close results. So, was there some other reason you felt differently? Or did you not look?

As far as the rest of your comment, I call bullshit. Everything is out in the open and nothing has been predecided.

This is an open election to get an idea of what the community would like to see this foundation be. The whole community.. because even if you think everyone who owns stake is evil in your eyes, they are also part of this community.

ALL community members matter and are voting in this election.

This isn’t leadership, it’s an idea of what type of foundation should be built. Then that idea will have to be implemented and will evolve over what is actually possible.

Everything has been open and transparent through this process by those selected (by the community) to “oversee” it. If you don’t want to support it, don’t. That’s your choice, but leave your bullshit at the door as there is no truth in it and it’s not beneficial for anyone.. especially the community.

Let's not go to the open and transparent while discussions behind closed chat rooms take place.

Everyone who holds a stake is not evil in my eyes. I read you as defensive and not of discussion. This can only be due to your own actions. Not the words I spoke. You are obviously not open to the possibility people do not all see the same thing in the same way.

Everyone else can have a point of view but me eh?

You do not have to agree with an opinion I form, You should be mature enough to accept I do not see everything the same way you do.

You're wasting your time mate

You could be right on that.

Or maybe I am not wasting it, and Simply sharing an idea. if others can grasp the size and rewards for the community from this concept, Then maybe the maybe turns around to maybe we can do this together.

I’m open to all discussion and was replying to your opinion that this process does not allow the community’s voice to be heard (as the numbers say otherwise) and call be on the accusations of those involved.

I’m sure many conversations happen privately all over discord and Steem, it’s called private messaging. All actions of the working group and Steem Alliance have been done in the open discord server. That is what I was pointing out, and it can be clearly seen for anyone who wants to look.

I do not believe people need to see things the same way as me and actually work pretty hard to ensure all opinions are heard and considered, even if I don’t agree with them. I will most definitely state when something is not factual though, if it pertains to something I’m involved in.. which is what I was doing. Stating your comment was not factual. Then I said you could support it or not, as that is your choice.

Opinions are great and always welcome, opinions based on facts are those that are the most beneficial though, for everyone.

Yes and about you all just put your own proposal together and ignore the rest. I heard about that.

The discussion an opinion bring is what counts not the opinion. All opinions no matter from when where or who they come from should be held equal.

If you cannot see how this opinion came about from the facts I hear about you saying to do your own proposal and skip the nonsense. How the post was published while you had ample opportunity to inform the rest of the community during a show that you had the intention to do so.

That you feel justified to override the community itself says so much. Which is basically what the committee to form a committee has done. not guide the process but be the process.

This again is just opinion. Everything I write is an opinion of mine generally.

Is debate really necessary?
Was it really necessary to attack me in your reply to begin with.
From that point onward it mattered not what you wrote. I held no respect for you from that attack.

I didn’t attack at all, in fact the opposite. There is no “let’s make our own and ignore the rest”, that is a silly statement. I gave input on a proposal, many actually, and have been extremely open about that.

Giving input on a proposal does not mean the others don’t count, as it’s up to the community to decide which idea they prefer, which is the point of this open election.

Even if I decided to make my own completely separate proposal (which I did think about), it still would be up to the community. More proposals give them more options, not less.

So, as I said, your opinion seems to be based on personal frustrations and not any factual events.

The goal here is to build the best foundation possible, with the best ideas brought forward, not to “win”.

More proposals, more collaborations and more ideas mean more options for the community and therefore a better end product.

The community is now giving their consensus on which idea they prefer, nothing more, nothing less.

It’s not pre-decided and there is no cloak and dagger, what you see is what you get.

If you don’t like the process, that’s fair. The volunteer group did their best, maybe it will be a learning experience for the community as a whole.

Have a good day.