I have been here nearly three years now, and yet continue to grasp aspects of the political machinations behind the scenes too long and well obscured.
All I seek presently regarding this issue is to present HPS proposals to subject people to censorship, rather than allowing it to be solely the power of one individual. Either the community controls the power, or the community is controlled by it.
Thanks!
The bottom line is that as long as the system is controlled by those with the most wealth, their minions will mostly call the shots. As long as society allocates resources in relation to wealth, this situation is likely to continue.
A solid and well specified design for an improved management system for these parts of the blockchain could result in a voted worker proposal and a Hard Fork - however, it still relies on developer acceptance and witness acceptance - so they would have to be consulted. I don't even know who most of them are at this point!
With steem the problem was that their development happened in a 'black box' environment, following their own private agenda. So far I don't see any difference in the way hive is operating, but I willing to give the situation a degree of time to demonstrate change.
I also don't see any difference between governance on Hive and how it was undertaken prior to Hive.
I would note that enabling control of #irredeemables list to be taken by community voting via HPS requires no HF, or coding at all I am aware of. The implementation of the list is what takes code, not control of the inclusions on the list, which is undertaken on Github, not the blockchain.
Clearly such centralized codebase precludes actual decentralization, but in this case controlling the #irredeemables list through HPS rather than @themarkymark personally doing so requires no HF. I don't think he personally has been hardcoded into the code the consensus is running for that purpose.
I have not elected to go along with anyone.