( image stolen fairly from google images, if you haven't watched "snowpiercer" on netflix it's worth the watch )
It is meant to draw attention to what I consider a glaring issue on our network.
It isn't meant to single out any one user or toss blame or shade around..
I don't expect anyone to share my views, but rather hope to invoke your own thoughts.
I'm well aware that voicing my observations and outlining them as I have in the below article may result in destroying any future support from the majority of upper echelon stake holders. In the event this happens it's ultimately not a big deal to me, but rather would serve as a clear indicator that my dedication towards development and the building up of our HIVE ecosystem would be better spent on a network that isn't effectively controlled by a couple of entities. I have said my peace now.
HIVE as it Currently Exists is Biased Towards Creating Monarchy
The disparity of decision making ability between the long time Top 20 Witnesses (the "elites") and the greater community (the "commoners") perpetrated by the current witness / inflation model.
As it sits the majority if heaviest accounts in regards to account worth have earned their stake/influence via running witness nodes over the past half decade or so (obviously this doesn't refer to guys who bought their stake like theycallmedan and encryptedbroker).
At current network Hive Power inflation and witness payment rates, after crunching the numbers it would take OVER an astonishing 20 years or so of being voted into a top 20 HIVE witness to reach an account influence / Hive Power holding level of the current heaviest accounts..
And even that 20 year to catch up figure is assuming NO more growth of the "elite" accounts of question. So it's very likely we see an increase of disparity of influence on this network grow unless measures are taken to prevent this from happening, which ultimately would have to come from those currently held in power or in the "elite" class.. Which is possible but unlikely to happen.
As it sits, given how the DPOS system was originally designed and how stake earned from said system can be used effectively once you and a group of other high stake weight allies reach a certain threshold, you can almost guarantee that your combined votes for each other and whoever else you decide on can be used to cherry pick who is in positions of great influence and wealth creation. Regardless of what you call this sort of action I'm not sure it's a great selling point.
This ability to "collude"* with allies to prop each other into top spots at a network level ends up in almost completely nullifying what the greater community vote is worth in regards to being able to participate in decision making ranging from who is DHF approved all the way up to who hosts the network as a witness, the whole community vote isn't combined isn't worth enough to overrule the influence of the upper echelon accounts.. We're at the whim of a select few.
Stating that HIVE Power can be used in network decision making against the elite class of users / witnesses is basically a crapshoot statement. As it's basically false unless you're prepared to invest millions into the network in order to offset the ever growing disparity between elite and commoner.
Change That Force Those in Control to Give It Up
With HIVE and other blockchain networks run on upgradeable software/hardware we're lucky enough to have the possibility of changing things by either having those in power agree with the changes, or by forking off into another chain allowing "new management" of sorts in the form of new witnesses run the network. As it sits a fairly decent percentage of the Top 20 Witnesses here on HIVE have been there for nearly the entire duration of both our prior and current networks and as it was stated above would take something like 20 years for an outside account being included in a Top 20 witness position to catch up to the current influence ability of said long time top 20 witnesses.
This seems completely broken to me, as the ones "in power" are essentially so deeply entrenched at this point the ability for the community to participate in voting is basically "lip service" because these top echelon long time witness accounts have the ability to completely overturn any decisions the community makes. It's a handful of users, who just so happen to be "untouchable" in regards to stake weight, completely calling the shots.. And to buy the stake equivalent would cost several million dollars, just to have a say in influence comparable to those top tier accounts...
Which obviously goes unsaid but sure as hell isn't attractive to any outside investor who actually looks at what is going on within the underbelly of our network.. It's a pay to win feudal monarchy of sorts rather than the democratic model it sells itself as, which sort of sucks for anyone without the millions of assets required to buy in enough stake to actually have your vote matter for more than a fairy fart, and likely a strong enough reason to dissuade serious outside investment capital...
In no way am I recommending nor trying to say that we should be forking off into a less power bias network here currently. I believe we should allow those in power ample time to consider and implement what's being written here before completely giving up on HIVE to create our own chain designed in a way that prevents the power vacuum situation we currently face..
Using Network Inflation to Guarantee Power & Influence
The current setup also ensures that those "in power" currently cannot ever be overthrown by any normal network user or any "lower caste" witnessing individual or group, ever, under any situation save some extraordinary circumstance. As that would involve being able to add well over 250 HIVE to their Hive Power / Influence daily to even match the HIVE earned daily on these highest ranked witness enabled accounts.. Which sort of goes without saying, isn't really feasible for normal people, let alone given the societal financial instability across the globe we're seeing due to the pandemic..
I can hear the responses in the comments from the upper echelon accounts now: "Well, if you don't like how things are run here, go buy stake and get your network influence up or fork off and do your own version" which while from their position seems like a valid response isn't really based in a reality that the rest of us exist in.. It's great that the upper echelons are financially stable so that they can afford to not have to spend the HIVE / inflation they're given and grow their stake..
Ultimately in the current system ends up in a "the rich get richer" type situation arising with not only the software, direction and utility of the network being dictated by the "elites" but in essence acts to ensure the "commoners" stay that way, providing free reign for a select few to dictate the future for the majority. Not sure about you, but I'm not enthralled with the idea that a "commoner" has less say and will always have less say than an "elite" type, regardless of how hard they work or some miracle.
A somewhat more realistic way of viewing this is that only a limited percentage of human beings on this planet even have what would be considered truly "expendable" income.. And those lucky enough that do, generally don't pour it into a network they're disillusioned with, as that would effectively act at enriching those who they're not keen on or in disagreement with. It's my understanding that when Dan Larimer designed this system he intended it to function to a lesser or greater extent as a democratic setup, however due to the stake distribution and how that stake is allowed to function on the network it seems the democratic possibility has eroded entirely.
Balancing the Currently Lop-Sided System
Only after powering down and being transferred to another account would the HIVE be eligible to be included in governance decisions. Even then this doesn't entirely prevent the "elites" from gaming this and propping themselves into power, but certainly would make it a significantly more difficult task to create the conditions we currently see with a few able to vote themselves and buddies into positions of power in which they're unlikely to be removed from by the community.
It will likely take a community effort of brainstorming in order to flesh out and prevent the creation of a future "old boys club" ruling elite class on our network, provided the necessary steps are implemented and then accepted by said ruling class. Again, there is part of me that is screaming "this is fucking useless, you'll never convince those in power to give it up" whilst another part of me sings "If you don't raise the issue and offer alternatives, things will never improve".
Those currently exercising power over the network are almost entirely likely to greatly oppose and vocally condemn the sort of things I'm putting forward in this article, as to be expected.. But if they were truly acting in the interest of the network as a whole rather than in their own self interest they'd be quite eager to shift the balance of power away from themselves to the community in an effort to make HIVE as a whole far more appealing to the greater crypto community, rather than hording power to shape the golden goose as they see fit regardless of the want of the community.
Removing Witness Earned Stake from the Equation
Of course this above example doesn't entirely solve all of the ways that the removal of witness stake weight from governance decisions could be worked around, but it would sure as hell be a good start towards building a system that acts more democratically rather than the current wealth driven system that ultimately acts as a "king maker", rather than valuing community vote count over the monetary holdings of a select few within the network. Even with the implementation of something as silly as "top 20 witness votes for other top 20 witnesses don't count towards witness rank" would greatly change the balance of power given enough time here on HIVE. Not only would the prior example serve to mitigate a lot of potential collusion amongst the Top 20 Witnesses but would also pass decision making onto the community majority instead of the select few elite.
I want an ecosystem free of a "ruling class" and the only way I could ever see this happening is if those "in power" were no longer able to ensure they stay in power, it should be open to the greater community to make decisions not a select few.. As at the end of the day even having the ability to cement your influence and power on a network serves to completely disassemble any form of democratic process or community driven decision making that could ever be possible in favour of making those already prosperous even more prosperous, seemingly at the cost of all beneath "elite" status whose voice and votes are effectively nullified. We must shift power to the community.
In Closing...
I suspect the "elite" users will completely ignore this post or comment that I'm fucking retarded.
On the off chance any member of that upper echelon actually agrees with what I'm saying here, awesome. Please help me make HIVE governance about the users and not about money.
Vote KLYE for Witness, Every Single Vote Helps, Thanks for the Support!
Need to get in Contact with KLYE?
Join the Official #KLYE Discord Server Today!
Looking for an Affordable, Secure & Reliable Server Host for Your Witness Server or Other Web Related Projects? Check out Privex.io!
I like out of the box ideas. You are right in many ways.
I am still gonna call you retarded in the hopes that somehow I get mysteriously promoted into the ranks of the elite. :OD
bahahahah. ffs.
I probably am retarded to question those in power.. But alas to sit in silence and complacency is a fate worse than being shitlisted in my opinion. All I know is that a non-cornered network appeals to me more than one where the thing is almost entirely under the thumb of a select few.
The Matthew effect is present to some degree. But even if I agreed with your premise of doing something about it, nothing comes to mind as a real fix. You acknowledge that tokens must be fungible, so that the non-voting tokens would have to revert to full-rights upon transfer. Let's be honest here, that's such a trivial workaround that it would make all of the work put into this change a waste of time.
Oh for sure. I'm not saying what I've outlined here is a cure all.. As the implementation of such a system to nullify the potential of an "old boys club" arising from a clean slate on a network exhibiting features as ours does isn't met requirements wise from what I have outlined.
perhaps it's too tall an order, but I think the "Top 20 Can't Vote Top 20" rule would be at the very least a step in the right direction. Requiring the top 20 accounts to power down their stake and move elsewhere to vote themselves.. Which would be detectable me thinks.
I appreciate the feedback! It's going to take a bunch of thought experimentation to come up with a viable solution, and even then we're left with the "elite" class choosing to relinquish their hold or the decision of having to fork off to implement it elsewhere.. Which is kind of shit for the most part. I don't like "holding peoples feet to the fire" in the slightest. :/
From a theoretical Hive-based clean slate: Establish different X Power balances for witness earned stake and other stake; one has a long power down schedule and the other shorter. Sum the balances for every influence measure except witness voting. Might as well establish a longer term for X Power earned from posting rewards, while you're at it, to help in stake distribution.
You're certainly thinking! I appreciate that.
I hope it doesn't come down to a clean slate via fork situation. I sort of like the HIVE branding and whatnot, but the stake distribution and the power said stake can exercise over the network as a whole isn't something that I'm going to pretend is acceptable.
Bought or posting earned stake should certainly have a greater effect orders of magnitude more than witness pay inflation stake.. But alas as you said it's going to take an assload of work to come up with a solution that doesn't harm users in the rebalancing of how stake is able to be used.
TL:DR;
HIVE governance is controlled by a select few elite users, effectively nullifying your vote and ability to determine the future of HIVE, regardless of the witness "voting" system, as the "elite" class users stake outweighs all of our "commoner" votes entirely due to those in power having the ability to ensure they will always be in power and effectively keep themselves and their decisions buffered by their ability to use witness payment stake to guarantee their power..
In the pre-fork and post Sun days, because there was a antagonistic relationship between the old witnesses and the Sun witnesses, there was a limited opportunity for those not in the aristocracy to veto blockchain upgrades. These who were mostly Koreans did this by voting in such a way so that neither Sun nor the old Hive witnesses had complete control and we could have seen a kind of Magna Carta like you described or a big shift in percentage of inflation for authors and curation.
These old witnesses didn't like the situation and ultimately did "fork off and do your own version." That's why there is Hive. I can't see you being able to convince
vaccine companieswitnesses to give up their royal positionThose in power will seek to remain in power.
Right now plenty is being done by the "elite" in order to ensure they're going to continue making maximum profit off their presence here.. The shift from curation rewards being lower to them being made higher is one example of this, as god only knows curation rewards are a fucking joke unless you're a whale HP wise. Not to say I'm thrilled about post rewards rewarding inflation HIVE and unpeggeble at the moment HBD as rewards only to have the "elite" class once again take this as an opportunity to seize absolute control and begin stuffing the entirety of the DHF funding effectively into their own pockets at the expense of the majority of developers funding, Yes, HIVE price is going up because of it.. But who holds the most HIVE? The fucking elite class who are using their influence to shove money intended for developers into
theireveryone's pockets.. but what the fuck do I know? I'm just a guy building the fucking ecosystem out for free at the moment.. Maybe I am retarded. <_<Honestly I'd rather these select few unicorn accounts realize that what they are doing and the methodology engrained here isn't something that is sellable to an outsider looking in unless they're absolutely oblivious to the shit currently going on governance wise. While I completely liek the idea of HIVE and it's community I'm less than impressed by the ability of the ruling class to denounce my concerns due to wanting to retain power or having absolutely zero respect for any caste or class below them. :/
Conceivably one could get involved with a Hive-Engine token with good tokenomics. Then migrate to this tribe token and develop only for that token. If youŕe doing something that uses Hive in some way, you could have it use Proof of Brain tokens, should you decide that one is to your liking.
Eh.. HE isn't an optimal platform to store wealth in partly due to the fact it's effectively base58 javascript running through centralized portals.. If I'm going to invest time and energy into creating a better architecture ecosystem I'd build it from proven examples and leave out the ability for groups of users to gang up and take over as we've seen here.
Maybe you can help one fantasy become a reality. Would you like to corroborate on a project that merges Monero with Condenser in away one could fork away from the money side of Hive without losing the community.
Depends on the timeline and budget, but it's liekly possible to some extent.. Granted if I was going to build a front end I'd not base it off condenser but rather build something custom.. Condenser is OK and all.. But the codebase could be seriously reworked to make it feel less clunky and more reactive.
Also it's written in react.js which is my least favourite framework. :P
Ah. I thought it was quite elegant to put code and structure together in "components" rather than referencing existing elements. Perhaps it is more about taste. Maybe there is something better out there. What frameworks do you like?
If you think Sun had anything but dictatorial aims for Steem, you haven't been paying attention. There was no working with him. We tried.
Fuck Sun Yuchen.
It is certainly an interesting system that was broken from day 0. It stands to reason why a lot of us never saw this as an attractive investment to go deep on.
I always felt that HIVE would have needed to get to $0.01 for it to make sense to jump in and take a large stake to have any level of influence.
Stacking DOGE has been way more enjoyable. 🐕🚀🌚
Just the very fact that groups of individuals, once far enough in front of the pack, will always be front of the pack, unless some individual is willing to effectively pay this group in order to have a voice within it.. Like fuck! How is that a good market offering?
We're sort of at a crossroads here I think.. You have the "elite" class basically able to do whatever the fuck they want unchecked while the "commoner" is fed the narrative stating they're participating in governance with their vote. Shit, even I fell for this till I started crunching numbers only to realize the %1 we have now in power effectively are so far ahead of the pack it would take more than most people make in their entire lives just to have the same influence within governance as ONE of the top accounts.
gg guys, Now if you could make some changes so HIVE isn't a fucking laughing stock both consensus and as a micro e-society that would be fucking great.. Because the whole "rebels who forked from oppression" thing that happened with steem was our 15 seconds of fame and sure as shit didn't garner the crypto community capital injection, probably due to anyone doing an analysis finding the same shit I'm now seeing.
it would be cool if those in power relinquished their fucking stranglehold and absolute control over the HIVE chain. I suspect it will either happen and HIVE goes to good prices, as developers will continue to focus on building use cases for the network.. Or it doesn't go like that, and those who value absolute control over community driven democratic methods will end up strangling the golden goose. <_<
It is upsetting for sure and I used to get all charged up about it because we all wanted to see this implementation of the technology succeed.
Also we have to understand that the elite accounts here view us like people on Skid Row out in LA. Like we are broke, stupid complainers begging for free handouts.
HIVE will lose even more traction to people placing more money into DeFi protocols. Those are a better mouse trap and they have been quicker to adapt to what people want.
People want quick access to their funds. In Defi you can stake and unstake right away and move your funds. Having this 90 day power down cycle isn't enticing. It needs to go a 3 or 7 day situation or always liquid like what DTube did.
The witness situation isn't enticing. The proposal system just feeds the same group of people.
Moral of the story........ DOGE is a lot more fun! 🐕🚀🌚
We're going to see exactly how things are handled after being brought into question here soon enough. I'm adjusting my proposal and have to talk to BT about his smart contract project to make sure we're not making a stressful conflict of interest situation or whatever and from there we'll see if by me questioning what the hell was happening and passing on the general community vibe that has effectively served to create a grudge from which no respect nor support can be extended from behind.
My Hive.Loans project is going to fix a large part of the power down problem. Should start public testing in a week or so. It's a game changer although given that future development support rests in the hands of folks I was a couple days ago openly questioning trying to satiate my need to understand exactly why things happened as they did...
The next day or so will be quite informative on if my voicing of communit concerns is after things have cooled down viewed as it was, concern, and forgiven.. Or viewed as something that deserves for a grudge to be held and support / respect not extended effectively as punishment or letting feelings get in the way of potentially paradigm changing development to be taking place.
We'll know in the next few days if it's ok to question things or if those who were concerned but remained silent for the most part were doing so rightly, which would be a fucking shame, because if the ones making our decisions side with viewing anyone conveying concerns as some sort of personal attack leading to the messenger's future support being effectively shot.. Then boy are we as a community in fucking trouble. :/
Yeah, I hear you. It is frustrating for sure and I know you are grinding away trying to improve things.
Me and several others just gave up on it and focused our attention other places.
I think a big opportunity right now would be for someone to build lending and Yield Farming out on the Binance Smart Chain for DOGE. The Binance Bridge supports DOGE but then it isn't on Pancake Swap or any of the exchanges out there.
That crew who is in charge here are just here to feed themselves and look at everyone else as a peasant.
Binance is aids. Even when compared to Blurt
Exactly, I downvoted his stupid comment! lol
We hate BINANCE though. Binance stole coins from me from inside their exchange. They also did that big scam thing with our votes to support Justin Sun. We are trying to to take Binance down. Sure BNB is the big hot thing right now, but someone has to show CZ he is wrong!
Kick the hive harder, Klye, this day has been long in coming.
lol, not sure if cheering on me getting absolutely tarred and feathered or if you're honestly backing the actions taken towards all this. I have to have a talk with BT here tonight or tomorrow, so within the next day or two here we'll know if top tiers are able to realize that criticism and general community feeling being expressed to them, if they're perhaps doing is something that isn't viewed as "cool".. is simply part of being at the top and is something that doesn't permanently colour a user poorly after the smoke clears, allowing for things to be forgiven and move forward.. Or if we're effectively fucked from funding support upon any sort of public show of questioning motive or trying to understand do to things being taken personally and not being seen for the concern it was.
Tipping point of sorts. Within the next few days we'll know if questioning things is viewed and accepted for the vital role it serves, or if by showing any sort of less than complacent or blind trust in the top tiers actions ultimately results in being black balled.
Stinkin' crapitalism taking me away from the hive drama.
Good on you for standing up, we've been getting a raw deal from the gitgo.
It's bs that funding is pulled from projects supported by many community members.
Maybe this will move us farther from the stinc that still tarnishes us in the market.