It cannot continue... but unfortunately what it feels like is that the ones with power to stop it don't really seem that interested in doing so. We keep seeing huge DHF payouts, we even opened the doors to rectroactive payments... no one in their right mind would invest in Hive nowadays. Like you, I spend a lot of time here, still enjoy playing games daily, but it's painful to see what we are becoming. And yes, we can be just a little community, but for how long? Right now, I would say: burn the DHF in its entirety, or almost all of it.
Thanks for another wake up call, they're in dire need. Cheers!
Are making enough money to pretend it is not a problem and pretend they are morally superior.
That exact proposal made me lose a bit of faith in Hive, look at how many top 20 witnesses supported that despite widespread community criticism
https://peakd.com/me/proposals/368
Some people are becoming what we thought Justin Sun would be for Steem.
We don't need to burn the DHF, it is useful for financing in terms of high liquidity and strong bull markets. The thing is, we may not live to see another bull market.
We don't need to, but I would be very curious to see what would happen if handing out massive amounts of HBD on a daily basis was no longer a possible option. ;)
Widespread community criticism is valid but it is also overpowered due to the timing of things, there were plenty of supporting comments as well to that proposal. I don't agree with you saying "they're making enough money to pretend it's not a problem and that they're morally superior".
That particular user has done a lot of valuable things for hive and continues to do so, just because they've kept pushing off doing a proposal when "time's were good" doesn't make their contributions any less valid.
I'm sure they could've had an easier time when splinterlands got $250k just to "survive" while they still have millions in bsc/eth pools to pay their employees today. Just as a perspective, I supported both.
Your Justin Sun comments are coming off quite offensive and out of touch.
The timing is exactly the point though. At 5 cent HIVE, with HBD under pressure, the same proposals that would be fine in a "healthy" market becomes existential now.
"Healthy" on quotes because our economy was never healthy, that is why we have reached this point. I mean healthy because we had liquidity to try and fail.
Which proposal and which user do you mean? I criticized several things without naming but all around the same principle. Are you talking about the retroactive compensation, Magi, Ecency, Keychain, HiveFest/ChainCulture, etc. Which proposal?
I am not saying people contributed nothing. Quite the opposite. A lot of people did valuable work but all of that was still cashflow negative. It is not an accusation against one individual but a flaw in how we have funded everything as a whole until this point.
When people are paid from Hive while holders keep absorbing the collapse, and then the answer is still mostly “trust us, this is good for Hive”, it starts to sound detached from the BAD INVESTMENT it is buying and holding. An all time low means objectively that everyone who has bought lost. And we have had almost weekly all time lows this year.
If I offended someone personally, I honestly apologize for that. If someone says “this specific line offended me because of this specific reason”, I will take it seriously. I want criticism, free speech and even some confrontation. That is healthy. But if we enter “offense” territory, then it should be specific, because I cannot sincerely apologize to a vague shadow.
I still stand by the Justin Sun comparison as a warning. Years later, Hive and Steem are worth almost the same. That should terrify us.
Either Justin Sun did not damage Steem, or we have damaged Hive more than we want to admit.
I am afraid of the answer either way.
In the end, both are worth almost the same as Justin Sun's Steem, so what gives?
Maybe check which comment I replied to? You only mentioned one proposal there.
Saying people are voting and supporting proposals, or not stopping in doing so are doing it because they are
is not offensive?
Hive and Steem being worth the same is a red herring, similar like most forks still having value while there's nothing going on there. Outside investors don't care to find out how much more progress we're making here and the potential because our marketcap is so low and we never get any attention outside of this space. The little attention we do get is from X which the recipient of your mentioned proposal has been very active in among many other things they do in terms of listings/partnerships, etc. I'd take retrospective proposals before "trust us we'll do this but need the money up front - don't worry we'll update you constantly, then disappear until a week before it's time to make a new proposal".
Justin Sun is a huge conman who buys his way out of prison because the world is corrupt, even bringing that up here sounds like you're just looking for arguments rather than healthy discussions. Just because the price of Hive is low doesn't mean it is damaged.
My comment was about proposals in general and I cited her then went back to talk about other proposals, sorry for the bad formatting and misunderstanding.
I am not saying she contributed nothing. I am saying contribution and affordability are not the same thing.
On the “morally superior” line: My point is that people earning from Hive experience this crisis differently from people buying HIVE with outside income while every holder goes underwater.
I agree retrospective proposals are better than “pay us first and trust us later”. But retrospective funding still needs to prove outcome, not effort, did they create measurable demand or reduce future DHF dependence?
I am saying that if Hive has apps, events, builders, community and activity, but still ends up near Steem’s market cap, then the market is telling us our progress is not translating into demand.
It is precisely because we have so many people working so much that it is sad. They (Steem) do nothing, we (Hive) do a lot, we both lose similarly, like this:
I don't know if you noticed how much the DHF is changing. It is shrinking significantly. Valueplan has only made one proposal this year, and it wasn't fully approved. It was only 80K, whereas by this time last year, they were already close to 500K.
There are 3 large (new) continuation proposals that have gone a month without being approved, and another proposal that has been running for a year and has another one to go, which is currently unfunded. Furthermore, there are very few days left before other major proposals come to an end, and it seems they won't be funded again either.
And why do you think that is? Do we see any fundamental shift on why DHF is used? If Hive price wasn't in the gutter now, together with the growing contestation of more users, I don't think we would see any difference on the status quo. And that's what needs to change.
I think it's a good thing, because it seems that whales are listening to the small fish, thanks to the noise they make. That gives us more power and helps with decentralization.
Hope time proves you right; I'm a little more sceptical :)