RE: Just So We're Clear - The Tech Manager of Steemit Is Anti Democracy and Pro Oligarchy - in His Own Words.

[baah]

They were so civilized that they invented Pederasty and Raped and Pillaged their neighbours, again and again, when they weren't fighting amongst themselves. It doesn't matter if 99% think that a law is needed, laws have never solved anything. You should consider your comment that "none ate anyone for dinner" because figuratively speaking that is all democracy has ever done. The notion that people can Mandate morality is what needs to be scrapped. In the context of Steem and Witness voting, it's hardly a Conspiracy or Centralization of power, even in the loosest sense of those words.

Comments

[lavater]

yeah laws are mostly unnecessary (I believe only in 1 law: don't use violence)...but in community governance sometimes decisions need to be made...and I believe if a decision reaches at least 90% of consensus among the population it is likely something that most can live with....instead now we have a tiny elite taking us into wars noone ever voted for and using our taxes to murder people. there will never be a 90% consensus for that unless the internet became completely controlled....and again such control would never be let through by the 90%. So I remain convinced direct democracy is a better system than letting some "illuminati" 0.1% Elite decide what is best for everyone....we've seen enough of it. time for a complete change and direct democracy, collective intelligence and wisdowm of the crowds are in my opinion the way forward.

[ura-soul]

The entire concept of the witness system is based on instilling the principle of decentralisation in such a way that consensus can be reached on the content of the blockchain and thus we can rely on the contents of the chain not having been manipulated. If the top witness positions are all controlled then the chain can theoretically be edited and controlled/censored at that level. Anything that limits the ability of any potential witness candidate from being able to rise to a top position, which does not limit SOME of the witnesses is itself a threat to the entire schema.

[ura-soul]

I don't really understand how you manage to, in every comment you make, twist what I have said into something I haven't said and to be frank, as you have done in every interaction we have had, I feel like you are trolling me.

For the sake of completeness:

So the concept isn't based on the front end, but then it is? Either the concept ISN'T based on SteemIt Inc or it is.

You have not been specific when you stated the phrase 'the concept' - so I am not 100% clear what you are referring to. The front end of steemit.com is the primary interface to the steem blockchain currently (in terms of numbers of users). The witness voting page is the only place in steemit.com to make witness votes. Therefore, the witness voting page is the primary interface used to log witness votes.

Steem actions and logs the votes, while Steemit.com is the primary portal for their input.

Ned has ceded that it isn't,

I do not know what you are referring to there.

you claim that because it can be controlled and because of Steemit "limits" the "process" (both of which are exaggerations and not small or little at all)

Not exaggerations, but provable fact. The only question is whether or not the limitation is deliberate or not.

somehow you think that steemit can ever be run like Steem

I have no idea what this means.

If I make a website like busy that phrases the data, and I "limit" the phrasing to only what I like, by your logic it limits and invalidates in a way the very notion of Decentralization through the Witnesses.

I am specifically referring to the witness voting process only, with regards decentralisation. I think you are missing the point.

[ura-soul]

I am muting you now as I feel our interactions are a waste of my time.