My issue is strategic. I believe Hive would've been better off if they'd have been dropped.
I am not following this @mattclarke.
Could you elaborate a bit more. I am confused.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
My issue is strategic. I believe Hive would've been better off if they'd have been dropped.
I am not following this @mattclarke.
Could you elaborate a bit more. I am confused.
@mattclarke is saying that there should have been no excluded accounts, other than those of Steemit Inc. By excluding users like @steemchiller, all that was accomplished was further resentment, bickering and the loss of higher ground in the whole issue.
As a matter of strategy, I completely agree.
Hive would've been the welcoming chain; the let-bygones-be-bygones chain.
Showing kindness when you don't need to, is very endearing.
The contrast against Steem would've been black and white, instead of grey and white.
The sociable, "people-person" witnesses like Luke Stokes and Aggroed understand.
It's the coders who just see ones and zeroes; and don't understand enough about human nature, who pushed through the hundreds of exclusions.
Now they're repeating the 'We're holding it, but we'll let you beg for it,' mistake that they made with Justin in the first place.
This could be mitigated, for example, by the app sponsoring the request to allow its users to be airdropped their Hive. It would save them the their dignity by alleviating the requirement to "beg". Having the clout of a major dapp would also go a long way in having the community back it.