I saw a post on X (Twitter) about a splinterlands proposal; basically, X is one of those places where splinterlands marketing and proposal talk thrives; many players who do not post on Hive but do on X actively participate in the game's governance. I have no idea about this proposal or what it entails.
In fact, I am not sure if it is a good one or not, and I do not think it has to be good or bad as long as it is what the big boys want. Even if it is not what they want, you could take some extra time to persuade them, maybe appeal to their benevolence, shake hands, have a nice conversation with them, and the proposal might just pass. It seems democratic and political, does not it? Indeed, it does.
"Over-ownership" Means Having money that overstates your voice
Why not?
This is one aspect of web3: while we prioritize ownership, we did not realize "over-ownership" could be a problem when it comes to progress and making the right decisions.
Governance Is Skewed on web3
Governance on anything web3 is always going to be skewed, because over-ownership allows people to overly exert their personal opinion, sentiments, and emotions, which can be compromised because of the depth of their skin and voice.
For example, knowing that your stake is enough to pass a proposal that pays thousands of dollars to the proposal's owner creates god-like power, and this is when a person begins to feel proud; the need to be worshiped, consulted, respected, and adored for having that much power and skin in the game (pun intended).
I mean, it is not their fault; it is just how humans are; when your ability to say yes or no has a lot of deciding power, it makes people feel empowered. I understand that anyone can put in money to compete or counter behaviors like this, but how many people in web3 have enough money to matter? Not very much, I believe.
This is why wealthy people in the web3 space believe that everyone must follow the money in order to be relevant, and that if you do not have money, you are irrelevant. It is one of web3's most notable flaws and strengths, and it appears to be more of the former than the latter.
Follow The Money Or Not
So this guy is furious that his proposal might not pass because he has not robbed fingers with the fingers, but I am sure he is been in politics and it is worked for him, and because he is probably trying to get out of politics, his proposal might sadly fail. I mean, does not it feel horrible?
I think he's probably backed out of the politics because he doesn't want to be in there again, it's rotten and dirty business, and sometimes people become too tired of being told to play the game to have their voice heard.
However, it is a sad situation in which people are ranting and protesting.
If there is one thing I know, it is that even the wealthy can make mistakes. The fact that they are wealthy does not guarantee that they will always be right. However, in web3, having skin in the game increases your value, and your opinion is almost like a decree.
On the bright side, it means that people can try to improve their standing so that they matter, which increases the project's value. To be relevant on web3, you must have more than just wit or brilliance, and it is not all rainbows and sunshine; politics can be extremely diabolical.
Interested in some more of my works
Is it Easy To Make Money?
Nigeria: A Unique Business Market & Industry
Virtual Bank Apps In Nigeria: An Experience Of Gamification
How To Find The Next "BIG" Meme Coin
Personal Finance: Achieving Intentional "Saving" Goals
Playing The Survival Game: Human Nature In Introspection
"Un-PAYING" The Debt You Owe
Posted Using InLeo Alpha
Have no idea about the discussion on X as I don't spend too much time there, but it's a bit silly that the conversation isn't held here on HIVE... Anyway, that's not the topic...
As @gadrian said, both "voting systems" have pros and cons, but in the end, discussion and dialogue are the most important... And according to your post, it looks like people involved in that case don't know how to communicate and run a dialogue... Also, many people find them selves offended very fast and it's impossible to keep a dialogue...
Decentralization is a nice word on paper, but when we have to accept someone else's opinion, we have a hard time doing so...
I agree with everything you said, Zoltan. I guess we need to have lots of patience. We all lived almost our entire lives in systems that had nothing to do with decentralization. Plus, in recent (quite many) years, society devolved into a more polarized one, where people stopped listening to the other party's arguments and counter-arguments.
Oh, man... You repeated the same words I used in BuzzParty in Hamburg when I was talking about decentralization... 😃
I'm a psychic and got into your mind! 😂
Either that, or great minds... You know the continuation. Funny thing is that great minds rarely think alike. They understand each other, but they are unique...
I agree too, the system has it pros and cons. It was majorly interesting to see human actions and reactions when it comes to systems that are in place to make things work. This was mostly my point of view into how these people reacted. it takes a lot of time and I think that people not agreeing on things is why progress can be slower
... but if they listen to one another, they can see if they find common ground and maybe a better solution than both the individual ones. Decentralization is slower to reach consensus (if it does), but also no one needs permission to build something that is generally open source. So development usually comes from multiple centers, or should, ideally, happen like that.
You said in your reply to Zoltan (and in your post) that this whale lashed out on X... That is sometimes a negotiation technique. If he really is tired of politics, I'm sorry for him, but that's what governance implies, whether it's the kind we sort of run away from from the real world because of all the lies, or this one with DAOs and stakeholders. Different systems though... I won't put our governance systems in crypto on a podium until I see into what they transform with time.
The guy with the proposal is not a whale, but he was writing the proposal knowing that not reaching out to the whales meant he might not get support. He was basically tired, he probably felt it was ass-licking the way he'd have to reach out to whales before he could put out his proposals.
Ah, got it. I don't know why I kept understanding something else. It probably helped that at the end of the day yesterday I was really tired after reinstalling the OS, apps and making optimizations.
But even like that, one needs to juggle a bit to gather support for a proposal. It's not once when even Matt's proposals failed. It's true, I probably wouldn't like this situation either...
You're right, it's mostly about the dialogue. However I didn't think the owner of the proposal wanted to dialogue, he might have done so with other proposals, and from the conversation on X, it really felt like he'd done that politics and didn't want to do it anymore.
Unfortunately he probably lashed out and that was how I got to find out.
I wasn't criticizing the system, it's just funny as well as interesting how in every system, our human instincts always comes to play.
Oh, man... You are hitting more and more nails to the right spot! 😃
That what you said in that 1 sentence is the BIGGEST problem that we have on HIVE... When a person thinks that he has contributed to HIVE so much that he/she can't be wrong and that everything that he/she says is a LAW and it has to be like that!
Exactly THAT way of thinking can kill HIVE... People with that attitude... Unfortunately, we have a couple of heads like that on HIVE, but I hope that the majority of Hivians will put them in place... 😃
Exactly, this was the main reason why I actually wrote the post. While I think the method of the governance isn't bad, it can become really political.
Of course, we all know some of those couple of heads on hive that actually think this way. Sometimes they feel like they deserve more and they eventually become nasty and quite difficult to deal with because of the drive force of their stake.
It was a hilarious to see it was happening on X
You can't blame him for trying since he has so much cash in there, but one person shouldn't be able to decide the future of the game when there are so many others with skin in the game if you will. People who hold large bags can usually get what they want if the rest of us like it or not!
How are you feeling?
I saw the guy complaining of this and funny enough the proposal might not pass because the people with the biggest stakes are the ones to decide what proposal will pass.
I'm basically here and stable, trying to minimize my expenses. Yes a Sunday so after the church service I'm just getting to write a post. How are you too?
Working on my post too, today is my HSBI giveaway one which is really easy since I don't do much original writing. It makes it nice for a relaxing Sunday.
I'm glad you aren't doing too bad, I'm always cutting back on expenses too. When I was able to work I had more robust budget, so now I have to be careful. Oh well, such is life!
Ahh the giveaway post, that's cool. Yes. I'm not doing bad at all, the anxiety creeps in every now and then, but learning to cope with it can be hard, but one has to at all time.
Well, no system is perfect, for sure. Just like whales can be manipulated to vote (or not) a certain way by making them feel important and decisive, in a one-person-one-vote system poor people can get manipulated to sell their votes for almost nothing, for example.
I haven't seen what the debate/discussion is about, but we know in Splinterlands there are plenty of discussions over DAO votes. Hard to learn to manage a new form of governance.
No system is perfect like you've said, and this i reiterated too. However whether it's web2 or 3, the human factor will always be in place which for me is always the main thing. It's pure politics out there, and yeah, it's actually the main sustainable voting system at the moment
!1UP Good work!
!PGM !PIZZA
Thank you
It's a tough thing to consider. There isn't much we can do when it's staked based for the proposals. So those with funds will have an advantage and I agree that the politics will be there. The people will smaller values can add up but I think a lot of people just give up.
When it's staked based, surely it's going to be flawed because of what's at stake. Pun intended. It's a system that's popular with web3, it's not bad, but it has its flaws
You have received a 1UP from @underlock!
@monster-curator, @ctp-curator, @bee-curator, @vyb-curator, @pob-curator, @neoxag-curator
And they will bring !PIZZA 🍕.
Learn more about our delegation service to earn daily rewards. Join the Cartel on Discord.
$PIZZA slices delivered:
@curation-cartel(3/20) tipped @josediccus
Congratulations @josediccus! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPThe thing I have come to realize is that if when is overshadowed by his personal opinion it will definitely affect his future because one person do not have it all. Collaboration has a way of contributing to success.