@blocktrades I have alot more context on the matter having been on the inside for so long, and I can tell you the Hive governance leaves alot to be desired.
As you well know, the troll you mention in your response dictates greatly to how the rest of the governance behaves, and rallied all of you to unvote my witness in unison because I simply told a Steem user who was on the fence about moving to Hive that I hope Steem will come right in future but for now Hive is the best decentralised alternative, I was being diplomatic yet my words were twisted to mean something else and you all descended upon me to wipe out the position I had built within the community over something so petty.
You yourself at this time broke your promise to me to continue to support my governance position after I compromised on my beliefs that we should not have frozen the Steemit stake, but rather blocked their ability to witness vote only. I went along with the witness quorum, and did not try to broker any compromise deals with Justin as per your request, yet the first chance you got you cast me aside when I was no longer useful to you, even after seeing the way I was being censored and maltreated in the Slack by more than one actor, you did nothing and said nothing, as a leader I simply would not stand by and watch other community members be maltreated in our governance channels, but seems you do.
In the same Slack, Drakos received veiled death threats and even though a vote was taken the perpetrator was allowed to remain while others such as @cryptofinally were cast out very easily. I too was cast out when I simply decided to go ahead and be involved with the startup team of Blurt, who incidentally were cast out of Slack too previously (yet the perpetrator remains) at that point I wasn't even a founder.
I have enough experience and inside knowledge to know the Hive governance act in vengeful mafia-style unison and only appear to be decentralised, when certain people say jump, the rest do so.
I took the high road and put my energy into Blurt rather than making a fuss on Hive and expose what really goes on. The rabid dogs however immediately came after Blurt and "cockblocked" the launch, forcing us to take a step back and refactor with fees to mitigate the spam attack.
In the mean-time prominent Hive leaders were taking the piss out of Blurt in the Slack, selling each other scripts to milk Blurt at "maximum efficiency" for $2.
The sad part is, even given everything, it was my wish that Blurt would be a form of compensation to you and the 60+ others who had their Steem balances wiped, but instead, you all decided to attack it and suppress growth, not only for yourselves but for every other user with a balance in Blurt, so many people in places like Venezuela could have had better lives with even a slight increase in the price.
At every turn Hive leadership would try to undermine Blurt, here is an example of us appealing to Binance to list Blurt for the benefit of everyone and one of yours slides in this comment in the hopes of derailing the initiative and yet still remains supported in Hive governance after actively trying to destroy value on another project.
In addition to this, we suffered a hack of WBLURT and the same server had keys to other Hive projects worth several times more but only Blurt was targetted, a clear indication this was a Hive-sanctioned attack. Finally, the set witness properties attack was launched to attempt to bloat our chain to suppress Raspberry pi deployment.
So before insulting @jacobgadikian's brain I urge you to use your own and get your house in order at Hive and support and encourage good actors to governance and not toxic ones who seek to take down other chains.
Unfortunately I don't have a lot of time to address the past, and it would take some time to talk about all the things you've mentioned in a comment this long, but your last paragraph really strikes to the heart of what I think is your misapprehension about Hive, so I'll try to address that.
It seems to me that you view Hive as some sort of traditional organization, with leaders and a bunch of followers. And that these leaders represent some form on united front on most issues (or that they should be doing this and they aren't).
From my point of view, this simply isn't the case. Most Hive users do have a few shared principles, especially those who are the most involved in promoting Hive as a platform for information exchange. Generally speaking, these principles revolve around decentralization of power and freedom of expression.
Beyond these core principles, many Hive users have radically different beliefs on many topics. Some may hate Steem, some may hate Blurt, some may hate Trump, some may hate Biden, some believe the Earth is flat and want to argue with everyone who disagrees about that.
I don't have the time or energy to personally deal with every individual user of Hive that dislikes some individual or organization. I don't aim to be that kind of "leader" on Hive. Sometimes those opinions are deserved, IMO, sometimes they're not. But if I spent my time and influence doing that, I wouldn't have time to devote to the software-based solutions I'm trying to build that I think can have a long term beneficial impact on our shared future.
I made a conscious decision many years ago not to go into traditional politics, and instead focus my energy on building systems that empower individuals. It's not a decision I've ever regretted.
I don't view hive as a traditional anything.
Other than your misunderstanding of how I see Hive, you and I are in full alignment here.
individuals have responsibilities.
Don't ever support anyone who wants you to censor this chain, or makes moves that could restrict user freedom.
I (personally) will always help you with anything that helps you protect freedom of speech on this chain. It's a values thing, you know?
I think we've common ground there.
All the above sounds good, and I'm glad to hear it. But one thing that mildly confused me, however, was that the comment you're replying to was addressing @thecryptodrive, not you. In particular where he was suggesting "get your house in order" which implies a different view than mine on how I interact with other Hive users and what Hive is to me.
TCD, just like me, is aware that the chain SHOULD NOT be governed.
It loses its purpose that way.
This said, with regard to privately run anythings, were this situation, or the cryptofinally situation to have played out on Blurt, I'd have tried to "get my house in order".
But you do you man.
(I think) I understand where you're coming from.
Look at yourself, someone who has said that they would not profit from @sbdpotato publicly. And yet on Steem you have powered up the funds and used them to derive profit by delegating them through your dlease service. The post can be found here: https://peakd.com/steem/@sbdpotato/sbd-potato-peg-repair-community-initiative.
A quick look at the wallet https://steemitwallet.com/@sbdpotato/transfers shows that you are profiting every day.
Calling yourself a good actor after that is just a blatant lie.
The funds on SBD potato are mostly idle on Steem due to SBD being over 1 USD most of the time, in the meantime I decided to delegate a portion of the fund on the Dlease market to users seeking delegation, the daily Dlease payouts come back to SBD potato and not to myself personally, there is a portion of fees that dlease earns, but I'm not about to go and request dlease be recoded to exlude fees from that account, if you bother to work it out the 10% dlease benefits is a tiny monthly amount and after that gets shared out to BUILDTEAM token holders and shareholders, if I benefit 100 Steem per month from that myself is probably too much, so please stop over-inflating the 10% dlease profit, it is almost nothing.
I also find it interesting how hive actors all abandoned their projects on Steem and shut down crucial services and tools without regard to the Steem community, they also spammed the Steem chain and openly attacked it, to the point they got their funds wiped but now when it suits them they hold me to uphold my promise to Steem so they can discredit me.
Hbdpotato is running again and helping HBD get back to parity as we speak.
The implied term of trust and confidence was breached on Steem by the Justin Sun takeover and heist of stakeholder funds, equally the same confidence has been breached on Hive by the continued attacks on Blurt and on my person even when I was active in Hive as mentioned.
It is precisely that I am a good actor that I have not drained these accounts for my benefit, but I am largely conflicted about sending them to the DAO or burning them for the benefit of platforms that actively seek to harm others.
I have considered alternatives like donating them to efforts like Curie or giving them out in Robin-hood style to nice people still within the community who support freedom and renounce tyranny. While Blurt remains under attack I feel that I should steward these funds as security for the time being.
It does not matter how much it is, even if it's 0.001 STEEM, you are still "deriving monetary value" from this project, and breaking the promise give to Steem stakeholders & community.
"As custodian of this project I, @thecryptodrive, will not derive any monetary value therefrom and undertake this under my duty as Steem consensus witness and ambassador."
I already proposed the solution in my post (Decentralizing Hive dApps: HBD Potato) and opened a pull request on Github, so you don't have to worry about not having devs to do it.
You received a lot of those funds from DAO, it should be returned.
They are NOT your funds, they were trusted to you by the Steem community with only one purpose: keeping the SBD peg. You can't just use them for something else.
Funds in SBDPotato and HBDPotato have nothing to do with Blurt. Even if Blurt is attacked 24/7, they should be either used to keep the peg or returned to DAO.
HBD/SBD work, right?
So really this isn't necessary, right?
He's alright.
What's your fascination with attacking blurt anyhow?
lol, I'm not attacking blurt. I'm just saying blurt and HBD/SBD potato are completely separated projects, so funds shouldn't be used for something else just because blurt is attacked.
I don't have anything against Blurt (apart from disagreement with a few small details (no downvotes, pretty centralized governance)), and I never tried to attack it.
Remember the days when you found the exploit in the Minnowbooster withdrawals and drained the fund, fun times! Nice to see you develop morals since then.
I precisely remember voicing concerns about your #HBDPotato initiative for this reason..
I'd like to see what you are doing with #Blurt, #DLease and the other #BuildTeam projects, but keeping the 200,000 HP that you said you would NOT derive monetary value you from, is a crime IMO 😔
Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.
How about wblurt?
I never had anything to do with wBlurt, while its code was based on Wrapped Hive, it was modified by wehmoen and I never saw its final source code or had access to its server.
Someone was, probably @edicted.
Could always be some other asshole though.
Let's narrow my "scope of attack" list down to key items:
See how I'm handling this now?
wait, you have evidence that edicted did it, or are you claiming that because he wrote it in the post as a joke in response to the reward for finding who did it?
@theycallmedan made a suggestion to @thecryptodrive which he shared with me to address the "hot potato" which is hbdpotato. With minor changes to terms, it looks good.
@thecryptodrive will share more details at a time of his choosing, but I'm just gonna go ahead and state:
Blurt loves hive
... and any place really working hard for free, open internet content. ALL of those places have our love.
Blurt hates assholes
@thecryptodrive is the finest dude I've met in the space.