Nah it has nothing to do with that. It has to do with them forking out Justin, milking, downvoting and trolling Steem and feeling entitlement to take it down, when they already forked their interest out.
Both sides are ridiculous and ruining the reputation of DPOS
Spammy behavior can easily be solved by censoring the account at the API level as they already did. The milking can be addressed by downvoting (an inbuilt mechanism). What they're doing is just theft, the witnesses soft fork froze the Steemit inc's balance, not good... Users were excluded from receiving a (at the time of creation) worthless coin who partially mirroed the majority of Steem accounts balance... Again not good! I disagreed with the means employed here but so far no red lines were crossed imo.
But, they are effectively seizing others people assets!
That's theft, hell they could even have done things right if they really wanted to shit on them that badly! They should just create a new chain and fork them out! But hey, there you can spot their lazyness, having to go through the process of reaching the exchanges to explain this mess will make them lose more face... So they doubled down ...
And you're wrong on that their soiling DPoS, their soiling all crypto with this childish behavior
Spot on: Two wrongs don't make a right. Neither does Three!
Yeah, there is much in what you say that I agree with.
Go away steemcunt.
Yeah its not smart. The smartest thing Justin could do is set powerdown time period to a year, then do a fork of Steem that excludes people on his list and redirect steemit.com to his fork.
Steem would slowly die and he wouldn't have the Hive loyalists spamming and dumping on the project.
You’re ruining the reputation of critical thinking and logical argumentation.
Oh...and fact gathering.
Yeah, it's totally ridiculous to think that people should just not touch other people's stake. what a crazy idea.
I think the reputation of DPOS, both good and bad, is earned.
This whole situation is interesting. And it does kind of prove, or at least indicate, that the idea that "This will probably not happen again" is ill founded. It also goes to show that people tend to be the same and that power seems to easily corrupt supposedly benevolent rulers.
There's good reputation for DPOS?!?!?!
Well, this situation has kind of shown some good. A single actor was able to take temporary control of the chain, but was eventually neutralized by the community at large.
A fork was created and the community was given an option.
I think those are both some good things about DPOS. I don't know if they outweigh the bad, but they're good.
Ultimately, when you look at how things turned out, all is right with the world. Nobody had Steem taken (other than maybe perhaps opportunity loss).
But that has nothing to do with DPoS...
You're talking about how blockchains can fork, that's not DPoS. Delegating Proof of Stake is only the act of voting on someone ON-CHAIN to decide consensus for you. That failed hard. If you're trying to say that Hive as a fork was a success, then you're talking about an off-chain solution being a success.
All I have seen from this mess is that DPoS is a complete failure and any blockchain using it is not sufficiently decentralized to be secure. Not to mention, with the resent lawsuit against EOS alleging that EOS is not sufficiently decentralized enough, it appears the government might soon rule that DPoS is not decentralized.
None are so blind as those who will not see.
Go fuck yourself, cunt.
I imagine living life while being as brain dead as you are must be pretty mundane.