Was there really plenty of cost involved in mining steem? At the very beginning. How could that be?
What do you mean how could that be? Are you aware of how mining works? The more hash power being devoted to mining, the more expensive it is to mine the same stake. So yes, it was costly, especially relative to the very high risk. There was a huge amount of uncertainty.
They were at a huge disadvantage to STINC. Yes, I am not entirely sure what that brings to the table though?
Who said the disadvantage brought anything to the table? It simply made mining STEEM more costly and risky. And put the miners in a completely different category than STINC.
But we have grown now. We have the means of funding developers and development. Do we need the early miners and their steem?
So fork people out because you deem them unnecessary? What, pray tell, do YOU bring to the table? Should you be forked out?
We didn't deal with the ninja mine. Look where we are.
I wonder if you understand the difference between STINC and the other early miners. Doesn't seem like it.
So I won't think twice before suggesting that if we are to start again then why be timid about it. Why not address issues now instead of starting with the same old flawed model minus a little bit.
Do you really want to give early miners more incentive to dump now? I'm not even sure why you're so hung up on removing their stake. Are you a socialist/communist or something?
Well, it didn't take much for the accusations of socialist and Communist to come out.
It's ok, people fear change. I get it.
And I would expect this kind of rhetoric from those who mined. It is only natural to safeguard what you have.
I think I understand perfectly well how mining works. I read with great fascination the mining debacle on here on other forums.
I don't think you understand that the purpose of the platform is not to keep those who mined early in pocket change?