Part of the purpose of my recent posts about expanding the witness voting page to go beyond 50 witnesses, is to do exactly what you are saying is needed here - to give other witnesses a fair chance to be found, voted for and to shine. I'm a bit confused as to why you removed your witness vote for me immediately after I publicly addressed this, since my actions appear (to me) to be in alignment with your stated objective. Maybe there is another reason, I don't know.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Hello @ura-soul, and nice to Steem you! :-) Thanks for your ongoing efforts around democratizing the Witnesses ecosystem, it's much needed!!
Regarding this topic, would there be a way to integrate in steemit.com the platform @drakos built some time ago? (this one: https://steemian.info/witnesses), which is to date the most complete Witnesses vote management tool and overall dashboard.
It's a great tool that I use extensively, and I only control 8 MV of proxy votes.
I find it hard to believe that any stakeholder with enough SP to move the needle is not going to be familiar with third party tools.
Aloha! Thanks! Yes, I posted a proposal for a new design for the witness voting page already, but did not receive any kind of feedback from the Steemit Inc. team - as with most of my other proposals.
I initially voted for you because I saw that out of the up and coming witnesses, you had a lot of potential to do great things.
I don’t really want to argue about the specifics of that particular change - but in my view it is not really the right approach to the problem. If you haven’t made a big enough “splash” for the larger stakeholders to notice you yet, then you probably need to keep working on your campaign. If you do make a big enough splash, then the stakeholders know how to vote for someone outside the top 50. It really isn’t as big of a deal as people make it, and I am speaking as someone who spent many months below the top 50 campaigning to make my way up.
I removed my vote because in my view you are not choosing to spend your time on things that are improving the platform for the stakeholders/users. You seem to be too focused on the things that specifically benefit witnesses, and things that are making it difficult for you move up.
Thanks for explaining. What I am actually focusing on is building Steem Ocean, which is an app that mostly only exists to deliver features that I think should be in Steemit.com but aren't. I have a long list of features to be added in to it that have been collated over a lot of work of talking to users and gaining feedback about what they want and need. Most of my research has sadly had to focus into understanding the black box system of Steemit Inc's feature delivery protocols, rather than on actually delivering features, since I get almost no feedback or answers to questions that are attempting to help the platform. I always get great support from the community for my ideas and they always say that we really need the features and changes I suggest. However the ONLY response I have had from anyone involved with the code is @ned saying that the idea to have witness vote decay was a good one and sneak just being sneak.
Along with having to deal with their tech manager's apparent mis-alignment away from the ideals that founded Steem, I have done what I can to find the time to deliver what the communty wants/needs - which has taken quite a lot of my spare time. I am also busy working with a client and considering SMTs for my own social network. Like you I am time limited here.
I think it's unfair to conclude that I am too focused on witnesses, since I actually only ever mention them in the context of bringing balance that is itself intended to maybe help average users get the features they need and maybe a fairer deal and better experience. I am actually posting as a user first and witness second. If you examine my utopian posts, for example, you will see that witness related ones are a minority.
I did not read your comment until the end.
One of the problems here is creation of "apps" instead of fixing and improving steemit itself.
Granted, creating an "app" is easier and more beneficial, but it does not improve the user experience of the majority, and it usually costs to use and dangerous.
You got a 28.57% from @th3voter thanks to: @stimialiti!
Image Source cloudinary.com
This post has upvoted from @th3voter !For more information, click here!
You can earn daily profit by delegating SP to our bot, 98% of earnings paid out to delegators. To do so, click below:
30SP, 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP, 10000SP,
Custom Amount
Make sure you have at least 15 SP left on your account.
You got a 33.33% upvote from @proffit courtesy of @stimialiti!
You got a 21.71% upvote from @luckyvotes courtesy of @stimialiti!
You got upvoted from @adriatik bot! Thank you to you for using our service. We really hope this will hope to promote your quality content!
You got a 10.00% upvote from @sleeplesswhale courtesy of @stimialiti!
you are very good at using the bidbot app created by another witness that makes apps... to complain about a witness only creating apps...
I do agree condenser is open source and witnesses can mod it to add what is missing and run it in hopes there is adoption and his changes might find its way into the official thing or the witness can choose to run infrastructure for it.
maybe not everyone is willing to do it for a particular reason ?
When I wrote "apps" I meant interfaces to STEEM which demand active key or posting key from their users.
I did not mean automatized services which at most charge per each use, in a transparent and aware manner like bidbots do.
The reason IMO for steemit/condenser being dumped in favor of "apps" is the corruption in the witnesses election process and the deep stupidity of most people.
You got a 21.97% upvote from @profitbot courtesy of @stimialiti!
Join our team and delegate your SP to earn passive income.
Get part of 85% @profitbot profit based on your delegated SP
by clicking on one of the ready to delegate links:
10SP|20SP|50SP|75SP|100SP|200SP|300SP|500SP|1000SP|custom
@youtake pulls you up ! This vote was sent to you by @stimialiti!
This is why, you have my witness vote and the other man does not.
Me too
Thankyou! Though maybe if you changed your name to 'supersmartwiseguy' the PR value might be higher here. hehe ;)
Hahaha, in all honesty, the name "delusionalmadman" inspires a LOT more confidence in the concurrent era than does the name 'smartwiseguy', lol. :-)
I lol'd
hahaha
You have my vote! You're quite active in posting. That's a good thing. You're also clearly a libertarian; the more the merrier!
I'd like to know more about this steem ocean. It sounds really cool!
Exactly, @timcliff. That's what I tried to tell @ura-soul as well - but I wasn't taken serious due to my blessing with freedom's vote.
No, you are judging me here - I did not say in any way that I did not take you seriously because of freedom's vote. I said very specifically and only that exposure comes as a result of being in the top 50 due to the vote page layout. The data points to corroborate that and testimony from some in the top 50 corroborates that. Clearly it is also important to receive votes from large stake holders and clearly not everyone is going to attract their attention, but the least we can do is give all witnesses an equal shot.
"I removed my vote because in my view you are not choosing to spend your time on things that are improving the platform for the stakeholders/users. You seem to be too focused on the things that specifically benefit witnesses, and things that are making it difficult for you move up." - @timcliff
^ Today I learned ^
But, focusing on things that prevent witnesses from moving up, that are VALID and documentable in the data is EXACTLY what opens the platform up and removes potential "obstruction of justice" so to speak for ALL users.
I'd argue for @ura-soul on the topics he has chosen to take on, as I also take them on, WHILE he still builds SteemOcean and I built a voice for ALL people, ALL communities and ALL inclusive on the @SteemStarNetwork (since the last station fell into the hands of a closet-socialist exclusive elitist who stole the people's voice) and a worldwide steem exclusive, block chain transparent humanitarian aid organization in the form of the @YouAreHOPE Foundation that the meta community at large loves to support. AND we choose to also seek and expose truths and theories about potential truths to the people for the goal of platform operational "righteousness" at the same time, man. And that includes witness gaming, and vote collusion and all sorts of nasty big money at stake B.S.
So there's that.
But now I know why I have never gotten your vote, despite the amount of respect and even, dare I say, admiration, which I have always shown you.
I just don't have it in me to pretend in the face of glaring issues and blow bubbles and rainbows I guess.
Correct
¯_(ツ)_/¯
Your credibility fell so many notches with me in this one word answer. Turns out you are just another "yes" man who is willing to "overlook" rampant corruption because to do otherwise and exhibit GENUINE conviction would sort of ruin your position among a gang that doesn't have much interest in real decentralization or equality, since you and them already got yours, it would be dangerous to be honest now...
I can understand why you would be upset with my one word answer. I don’t think you understood what I was going for, but how could you since I only gave one word :)
I have gotten to know you somewhat well since I initially met you, and I like you as a person. I think you have good morals and want to use your life to help other people. I respect that.
I was mainly responding to your comment about me not voting for you as a witness. As you stated in your comment, you were correct that my not voting for you is based on the priorities that you are focusing on. I disagree with them, but I also respect your right to focus on whatever priorities you want. I also already know that neither of us is going to convince the other of our point of view on this matter - so there is not much of a point of “arguing”. My one word response was basically an expression of that.
I’m not really sure what corruption you think I should be fighting, but in general “fighting corruption” is not really one of the things that I see as an important role of my witness duties - so if you see that as being dishonest - then this may be another area where we agree to disagree.
As a witness I feel that it is more important for me to focus on what parts of the protocol are allowing corruption to take place, and whether I should be advocating for or against any particular changes based on that. If there are any points to discuss in this area - I’m happy to share my views.