I understand all your points @bitcoinsig ... We've already gone over most of them and I certainly understand your point of view. On many things we agree. For instance the proposal was changed and I think that was the guy's first post ever. When he asked what to do, yaba told him it was ok and that's what the pre-proposal stage was for.
Another instance where I agree is you don't believe this should be a license to take people's property which is technically an "anti-bot" proposal. I don't worry about such things only because I'm probably more trusting than you - I admit I'm assuming this. But I can understand you think its possible, so it makes you uncomfortable to vote for it without some kind of protection against that. I on the other hand say, a) no one would be dumb enough to lose $100 to propose that and b) if they did, then there's no way it could ever get even close to enough votes. My thinking is way more lax than yours on this issue, so I understand where we would disagree and our vote would be different even though we both would agree that no one should ever have their assets taken if they bought or earned them.
And on the opposite side of that, the way the proposal is written the team can take 30 years to implement this. It doesn't give any timeline and leave everything up to the team to decide. I view that as a positive because it lets the team be the trusted ones to decide the right timing, because I really don't thing the community at this time could ever agree on a proper time. So its either vague or nothing. You are probably more comfortable with nothing, where I am ok with the unknown time issue because I feel the team will be reasonable and attentive since the community voted overwhelmingly for it by definition. That doesn't mean that we don't agree that it could be better and have an agreed time of implementation, it simply means that I'm willing to accept a deal and trust the team instead of have a time frame. You on the other hand, might want to have a deadline for implementation as one of your reasons.
And the same can be said of about every issue in this.
I see it as an pro human vs human mode, you see it as an anti-bot vote.
On the economy, many see it as something that will kill the value of cards as all these bot farms dump and never return. I see the economy issue as growing the human player base which will ultimately lead to more cards purchased not less. And btw, both sides can be right too.
Just like in life there are people that don't have a strong opinion, people that have very strong opinions, and people that don't care. In this case, there are also extremists on both sides of the issues (I mean by extremists as people that take the logic to the extreme and extrapolate vs violent extremists in the real world). These extremists take the view that their worst fears will be realized if this loses. This exacerbates the conflict as people start defending their point of views out of fear.
And on top of all that, this is an economic issue. Everyone will be effected in some way. Since the total rewards will stay the same, and assuming no one leaves or new come aboard, then that means that all that will happen is the rewards will shift from one group to another. Naturally the side that will lose out will assume the worst, and since both sides feel they can lose, then that means everyone is sorta fighting to protect their wallets.
But for the record, I look at it and say, I know I will lose money because my modern bot accts will have to move to wild, and while I will play some ranked matches manually, I certainly won't make up for those losses. But then when I realize that this can bring in new blood by incentivizing new players to enter and old players to improve their decks so they can participate in modern, then I think that's exactly what we need. We want players to feel good, make money for playing this game called splinterlands.
In the end, if enough new players enter and have a good experience, then splinterlands grows. So I'm willing to take a small cut in my bot payouts to enable that to happen. While I realize some think that will be like a 90% haircut because all bots will jump in and immediately destroy Wild, I really don't believe that for 2 reasons. First, because a lot of botted accounts will start manually playing in Modern because the rewards are higher, thus keeping them out of Wild. And second, because land will take a ton of cards off the field so EVERYONE will make more than they are making now as the true variable will be the cards being removed from both ranked.
So I realize that you have issues and have good reasons for voting how you vote, I hope you realize that not everyone is an extremist or a hypocrite or whatever name people are assigning.
I do think the tensions have been high and people have said a lot of things that they didn't necessarily mean. And others may mean them, but later find out they weren't true. In my case, I did jump to the conclusion that the 3 of you were talking about me, but as I said that was wrong for me to do and I did attack you personally for it. That was wrong and I am sorry.
I can't wait for the vote to get over so that people can move on. I think almost everyone here fighting and arguing about it truly cares or they wouldn't be. So I will try to do better tomorrow and going forward about being more tolerant and understanding, and I will certainly remember how you and torran felt when I lashed back at you both. I hope I do better and I will do my best.