You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Witness consensus status to fix the actual steem’s economic flows (ENG)

in #witness-category6 years ago (edited)

I don't appreciate that some of my answers to this chart were simplified into a trinary system. You're mischaracterizing my intended communication. If I had known this would be done I would not have participated in answering this survey.

Please either restore my submissions to this survey as I put them or remove my answers entirely. Thank you.

For further explanation, three of my responses said "See comments" and were replaced with "ACCEPTABLE" which is labeled in this post as "ACCEPTABLE: Witness wouldn't vote against (if majority does) but doesn't necessarily approve of it." This was not what my comments said, and it's unacceptable to put words in my mouth and go on to publicly share that.

Sort:  

Similar here. One of my answers was simply removed, which is not representative of my opinion. But I know that @cervantes will update it asap.

The spreadsheet in the post has been updated.

I've also written down a post explaining my decisions:

https://steemit.com/witness-category/@therealwolf/witness-consensus-therealwolf

PS: the upvote from @steemtank was an auto-vote mistake. I'll keep it on since it fits anyway, but it has been fixed.

Of course, doing it asap. Sorry for the error.

I also thought our comments would be represented as rationale for our current position. Can they be added un as well? I added a comment already linking to a thread about my thoughts which were the extent of my comments anyway.

Adding the link to your comment as well.

I‘ll adapt it asap @pfunk. My wrong. Just tried to adapt the response to the three available ones. I misinterpreted your comments and for that I publicly apologice. Let me know how do you want it and I`ll update.

Thank you

Agree. The comments on the original survey should disclosed (where relevant but probably all), and I'm not sure what happened about changing responses but that sounds terrible.

EDIT: Looks like the post has now been updated. Thanks for doing that @cervantes.

I`ll update also the post with the original comments if required.