RE: 3 Month Retrospective

Communicating with the community has improved whitch is great.

However I find the "EIP" discussion as bad political move at minium.
There are plenty of negative blog-posts about it (though no-one bothers to mention that here). I put here the main issues:

What is direction of steemit inc?
For a moment it seemed like steemit incs strategy was to make steem infrastructure token with the smt's. However the "EIP" proposal suggests that steemit inc is considering steem from purely steemits perspective, by suggesting to modify the distribution algorithm in a way that could be damaging to Dapps, without considering it in the initial suggestion.
Why does the "EIP" changes have to be thought in a "tandem"?
What is the benefit of having them all at once? This was left very unclear to me.
Way too radical!
Changing curation rewards to 50% alone is already too radical. From current 25% to 50% is a whopping 100% increase. If we are considering steem as potentially 1 billion $ crypto-coin, such moves are too radical to be done at one time, and will not build trust of future investors. Why could it have not been from 25% to 35%? Do we have to ram and rush everything into 1 fork?

I also want to say few other things.
Steemit is realy bad for discussing. People will just generally comment on blogs that support their opinions. Attempt to gather some form of community opinion from here is very hard, due to way steemit works.
If the "EIP" has seriously been discussed as a whole among witnesses and they are all willing to aprove it as it is, I must call them incompetent. It does not make sense that non of them would be against it as it is. They have also not bothered to make any bigger blog-posts on their witness accounts about this subject. Some of those nerds need to man-up and become politicians, we have enough people reviewing the code and too few doing politics.