SCT.암호화폐.Crypto

[공지] @proxy.token 증인 투표 운영 방침(@proxy.token witness voting policy)

@proxy.token 증인 투표 운영 방침(@proxy.token witness voting policy)

현재 스팀 블록체인 증인은 구 증인 그룹(5계정)과 저스틴 선 관련 증인 그룹(15계정)이 대립하고 있는 상황입니다.

( Currently, the STEEM blockchain witness group is at odds with the former witness group(5 accounts) and Justin Sun witness group(15 accounts). )

이로 인해, 스팀 블록체인의 변화를 주도할 수 있는 하드포크를 양쪽 진영 모두 진행할 수 없는 상태입니다.관련자료

(Because of this, both camps are unable to proceed with hardfocks that can lead to changes in the STEEM blockchain. Related Link)

트론에서 인수한 스팀잇에서는 오픈 레터를 통해 앞으로의 계획을 밝혔습니다.

(The Steemit acquired by Tron reveals its future plans in an open letter.)

구 증인 그룹에서는 투표 독려 활동 이외에 구체적인 로드맵을 제시하지 않았습니다.

(The Former Witness Group did not provide a specific roadmap other than the campaign to encourage voting. .. witness voting ? delegating proxy ? )

@proxy.token에서는 아래의 사항에 대한 증인들의 입장이 확인되는대로, @proxy.token를 통한 증인 투표를 진행할 예정입니다.

(@proxy.token will vote on witnesses as soon as witnesses confirm their position on the following:)

증인들에 대한 요청 사항(Request opinion to witnesses)

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가?

(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가?

(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가?

(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가?

(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

@proxy.token은 640만 스팀파워를 프록시받은 steemcoinpan 커뮤니티 증인 투표권자로서, 상기 질문에 대한 증인들의 공개적인 답변을 검토한 후 증인투표 방향을 결정할 것입니다.

(@proxy.token is a proxy witness voter in the Steemcoinpan community with 6.4 million steem power, and will decide the direction of the witness voting after reviewing witnesses' public answers to the above questions.)

Comments · 50

@arcange(79)· 2364d
Congratulations @sct! Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:
- Comments - Ranked 2 with 125 comments
@steemitcuration(63)· 2364d
The things people will agree to, to get a vote you could have done all of the above previously but didnt now to save your own asses your agreeing to anything. @proxy.token ask these lot to suck you off and watch a que form
@justinsunsteemit(58)· 2364d
SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? ) Yes! three Days 스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? ) Yes! 스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? ) Yes! 유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?) Yes!

I want to add one more thing.

Nobody (including me and witnesses) can freeze anyone's assets. Everyone assets should be safe!
@abitcoinskeptic(75)· 2365d
Posing this as a question to witnesses is a good start to open discussion.

Please summarize opinions and make dpoll for stake based voting not witness proxy.

Most witness votes right now are not accurate of true support.

Also to be fair there should be an open question

[OTHERS]
@dr-frankenstein(66)· 2365d
@sct I just hope you can see through the layers of hypocrisy and BS and make sure that the right things are done before spreading your support.

Funny, now everyone is giving a shit about the Korean community. Several witnesses and people here made racist jokes about them a day or two ago, now this? The change is unbelievably transcendent.

A lesson to learn.
@tanlikming(66)· 2365d
i agree the article what you said.
@cervantes(78)· 2365d
To the korean community:

First of all, thanks for having upvoted the necessary amount of top witnesses to protect the chain against being controlled by one single entity. That was a honourable step.

Second we would like to comment on your opinion requests:

(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

I have my serious doubts about shortening the power down period to less than 4 weeks. The problem I mainly see is that a too short period will give custodians accounts - such as exchanges - the possibility to power-up customer stake to inference in the blockchain governance. Today we are protected by the fact that powering-up the stake will effectively lock the customers liquid stake which could derive in the possibility for them to perform withdrawals on request. Imagine what would happened if you go to your bank to cash out some money and they deny your paynment due to liquidity shortage. Even worse, the bank tells you that they have invested your stake in a long-term investment fond. At the same time,I agree that 13 weeks could be too long for a sort-to-mid term investors type and it could force them to his invested stake liquid loosing the paid interest rate distribute among SP holders to compensate inflation.

(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

I in-fact see the need of the actual downvoting policy and I will not willing to remove it until we find a way to ensure or support content discoverability. As you know, we are a content oriented social network. The economic incenivation should be done in a way that the network rewards "good" content better than bad or abusive content, Of course, content curation is subjectve measurement but we need a way to signalice likes as well as dislikes. Might be it will be usefull to have other kind of not that negative user interface, since a just a dislike (downvote) is not representative enough. Sometimes you agree that a post would be not worth more than, han 10 dolars. If the potential reward at the time of voting is 20 dolars, the curator will press the "downvoting". The autor would than get the impression than the curator does not like his post at all, but in reallity, he likes it, just not "that much". Perhaps a change in the UI to signalice that you are willing to value it at 10% and the sistem performs the vote/downvote automatically depending on your tarhet value.

(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

I think to introduce smart-contracts capabiities into STEEM blockchain will result into more costly and unpredictable operations. Thd good thing about steem that it does not too many things - only social operations - but these are quick and cheap and much more escalable for a muldi dapp blockchain.

(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?) Im not sure what you are referring with this question, perhaps I need to dig more in details to get your exact requirements. With my first understanding I would suspect that a subscription model is anyway something to be managed at client level and not at blockchain level.

And at least, sorry for my bad english. As you might know, im a proud spanish native speaker.
@abit(71)· 2365d
Thanks for the questions.
- SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )
While shorter power-down period adds flexibility to investors so that they can get out sooner when needed, on the other hand, it adds uncertainty to decision making E.G. SPS voting thus may impact development.

IMO the system should find a balance to attract both short-term and long-term investors. Perhaps we could have 2 types of SP, one type is short-term which is for daily activities E.G. posting and post voting, the other is long-term which is for decision making E.G. witness and SPS voting.
- 스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )
"Gaming the reward pool" has always been a concern, that's why the down-voting feature is there. IMO down-voting should cost the voter something, because "stake talks". For example, my @adm account has been "donated" to @steemcleaners to fight bad contents since the very beginning of Steem, at my own cost.
- 스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )
Introducing smart contract is generally a good idea. However, there might be technical issues involved. On the other hand, although there are a few blockchains with smart contracts doing well, there are also quite some blockchains support smart contracts but nobody use them. The competition is hot. So, I'd say, if we have the resources (developers, funds and etc) and we can afford to lose the competition, we can do it. The key is to find our niche.
- 유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)
I'm not sure what does this mean. It seems a business on top of the chain to me, but not something to be built into the consensus. Generally we welcome all legit businesses.
@ats-david(75)· 2365d

“Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?”

I’m willing to discuss those options, yes. My preference would be 7 days, at minimum.

“Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?”

No. But I am willing to move all social voting and interactions to second-layer platforms managed by communities that issue their own tokens and set up their own voting rules.

I would like to see STEEM become a utility token with governance voting rights, SPS voting rights, used for witness pay, and as a gateway to creating communities and launching/trading tokens. This would resolve most of the on-chain disputes over other people’s money/rewards.

“Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain?”

Yes, assuming the chain can adequately handle smart contracts.

“Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?”

Absolutely...as a second-layer option. See comments above regarding STEEM as utility.

Personal note:

I understand that the Korean community believes it has been or is being treated unfairly. I don’t know how supporting a hostile takeover helps you achieve your goals. With Steemit Inc. now toothless, we have an opportunity to make this community work for all of us, not for one single entity...or for one single person in that single entity.

Please don’t squander that opportunity because some people here have seemingly wronged you. There is a ton of common ground that all of us already have.

You can read the history of my account or my witness account (@ats-witness) for more background.

Let’s resolve the current matter and make Steem what it always could/should have been.
@gtg(76)· 2365d

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가?

I'm not negating shortening power down period, but there are serious security implications (as you can see in current case - exchanges were willing to abuse funds just because they were promised to PowerDown fast). Such "light" stake should be restricted when it comes to impact on governance. One of many potential solutions was presented some time ago by Steemit Inc., but recent events caused their leading blockchain developer to resign.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가?

Votes whether up and down are integral part of Steem, i.e. e-Steem-ation of content via so called proof of brain (but sometimes lack of there of). I'm happy to see SMTs that combined with communities can figure out their own reward distribution models that would include no downvotes if a given community desires so.

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가?

Steem itself isn't designed for smart contract, but it's possible to use similar solution to a middle-ground blockchain for compiled code and smart contracts that one of our witnesses developed to enable it for BitShares users.

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가?

I don't know what you mean by that but I beleive that's something UI based that's up to service providers. Steem transactions are free.

Please note that the witnesses are not really someone who make decisions. Witnesses are servants of the platform providing security and reliability to serives, like in every DPoS system there are stake holders who vote accordingly to their desired way of how Steem should look like.

These days there's also Steem.DAO that can be used to vote for desired changes and implementations and their funding.

Thank you for voting responsibly and at least not allowing centralized entity to override governance of the platform.
@pharesim(74)· 2365d
Okay, I'm happy to use this opportunity. Not only because of the current situation, but because I think there have been a lot of misunderstandings with me, @curangel and its team the last months.

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

I personally like the longer power down, because it prevents me to take emotional decisions. I'm sure it is a big reason why I'm still interested in this community after 4 years. I also understand that other characters might prefer to get liquid sooner. As other witnesses said, <7 days is difficult due to double-voting concerns. But 7 days+ for the voting stake is absolutely no issue. I would prefer when stake used for witness and SPS voting needs longer to unstake, to prove a long term commitment with these important decisions. I am not trying to enforce my own opinion on everyone though, so if a decision between two technically sound solutions has to be made I generally try to take up as much community feedback as possible and act accordingly.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

Definitely for communities and their SMT when they choose so. For STEEM, I deem it very important to have a countermeasure to excessive self voting. If that didn't exist, I would have to self vote myself all the time, and could not use all my stake to support as many small users as possible just for the curation rewards.

Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain?

Smart contract platforms do currently have scaling and other issues. But if a good solution to the problems which became emergent on all these platforms, which had to fight with chain congestions and even halts, is found, this would absolutely be a worthwhile addition. Requires time and funding though, something as complex as that can not be rushed.

Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?

Yes, either in the ways already described by for example drakos, or even better an implementation that automatically burns a percentage of the subscription fee.

I really appreciate these clearly formulated questions, and welcome anyone who wants to approach me with more to meet me on discord, write me an email or comment on a post of mine. I have always tried to be accessible to all parts of the community and especially to the non-english ones, and hope we can all find ways for better communication in the future.

I have a request too: If anyone can connect me with a curator who is interested in searching for exceptional but undervalued content in languages curangel doesn't cover enough yet, please do so! I have made several attempts especially for Korean, but unfortunately did not receive replies so far.
@timcliff(74)· 2365d

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

Yes, 7 due to prevent stake from double voting on content within the 7 day window. I would also like to see users have the option to stake for longer though (if they choose) to allow for greater security if they would prefer to have their funds locked up for longer. For users who want to power down quickly, they could choose 7.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

I support individual SMTs being able to choose whether or not to allow downvoted for their SMT.

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

Sure, if it is properly implemented and tested.

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

It sure how this could be accomplished on chain, but I am open to the idea.
@drakos(70)· 2365d

(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

A few days power down is too short and opens the door for vote abuse on rewards: vote, powerdown, powerup/delegate to another account, revote. This is unacceptable. The minimum should be >7 days (past the reward payout). Also, short powerdowns allow hackers/phishers to steal funds very fast before account recovery is processed. The power down has been extensively discussed and I'm in favor of a 4 week period, it's a good compromise especially for security reasons.

(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

The downvotes were designed to prevent abuse, otherwise it would be a wild west for circle jerking and reward milking. However as mentioned by @netuoso, with the upcoming SMT's you can control downvotes and exclude bad users are you please.

(Are you willing to introduce smart contract into the STEEM block chain? )

Sure, why not, adding technology to the STEEM blockchain is always welcomed. It may require a lot of development (look at SMT's... we're still waiting for them after 3 years of promises).

(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

You can have your own model right now without any additional blockchain development. By creating accounts for users yourself and giving the private posting and active keys to your subscribers, while retaining the master password and owner key. After the subscription expires, you change the password, which will consequently change all the private keys. If the user renews subscription, you give them the new posting/active key. And finally, with communities, you can grant the users access to them or not. The current system is very flexible as you can see, and readily allows a custom tailored subscription model.

I hope I answered all your concerns. I'm witness @drakos and your vote would be appreciated, especially in this troubled time. Thank you.
@yehey(64)· 2365d
SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? ) Yes. Follow the industry standard for 3 days. I believe on Steem, so I don’t have to worry this withdrawal issue. If the investors want to withdraw their money, you can't stop them anyway. Give them the opportunity to invest and reinvest.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? ) Yes. Downvoting is a discrimination especially to minnows who doesn’t have the voice to counter vote when downvoted by the larger account. The community can use the UPVOTE to acknowledge authors, and ignore the bad ones. Everyone has the opportunity to grow, not just friends of whales.

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? ) Absolutely Yes. We need useful features added to the STEEM.

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?) Yes within SMT. Paid Subscription Model should be independent and managed by SMT owners. Not in the main front-end website.
@jacobpeacock(74)· 2365d
@proxy.token I wonder about the correlation between Kucoin, you amd the Korean community. Look at this announcement. There is a media push on Twitter as of this morning promoting Kucoin. https://twitter.com/kucoincom/status/1235186537085583361?s=20
@bil.prag(76)· 2365d
Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

less than 7 days will from what i understand not work on the steem blockchain. 7 could maybe work.
@dragosroua(75)· 2365d

(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

Minimum is 7 days, anything below this would add too much instability.

(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

I wrote more than 3 years ago a proposal to mitigate this: https://steemit.com/steemit/@dragosroua/yavap-yet-another-voting-algorithm-proposal-or-what-i-actually-understand-by-proof-o-stake

(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

Yes

(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

Yes
@ammonite(73)· 2365d
These are conversations to be had but at the moment your vote is for centralisation or decentralisation. You decide.
@aggroed(80)· 2365d
Powerdown is a great conversation. I think we have to make it faster for investors and people only interested in post rewards, but we have to keep it slow for actual chain governance. It's bad for the chain to let people who only want to turn a very short profit to be able to take control of how the chain operates and have no stake in it's long term existence.

I currently think the best way to accomplish this is to treat steem in savings account like a SP delegation back to the account owner. So, If I @aggroed move 50k liquid steem into savings the blockchain also treats that like a 50k Sp delegation to @aggroed.

Majority of chain stake supports downvotes for steem and choices for SMTs. When we make it through this all commmunities can choose to have an SMT without downvotes.

Every smart contract chain ends up at the same place. it can't transact. Human creativity >> 1 set of servers. The best option is to limit smart contracts through layer 2 solutions and not make them entirely open. Splinterlands and steem-engine both show how you can get all the features of smart contracts with steem without forcing all computing through one set of servers. Smart contracts can also be ignored. Cryptokitties can just stop putting gen 0 on their website.

4 subsription. On the Splinterlands market we charge 5% and give it back to tournaments. We did this to give some incentive to 3rd party apps to form. Something similar could be done with steemit.com.
@udezee(71)· 2365d
It will be unfair to the reward pool to shorten power down period from 13 weeks to 3 or 7 days, this will cause some serious disequilibrium to the payout window which is capped at 7 days. If you want the PD period shorten then payout window will also be shorten and steeming will lose it's purpose.

Also I know a witness adding value to the chain, whom runs a decentralized banking service. This will hinder such service that has being a life saver to the community in dire times.

Other requests looks negotiable.
@deniskj(67)· 2365d
Frankly, I understand where the animosity is coming from when it comes to the SCT community. The newsteem mantra brought about a coordinated downvote effort by large Steem holders that targeted various Condenser communities. I won't mention them because they know themselves.

I was always against the free downvote pool and witnesses must admit to the part they played in that and offer a way forward that puts authors first. People first.

We already know Justin Sun will not do that. He admitted that all he wants is to pump and dump.

What would happen in a 1-3 power down window if Justin Sun dumped all his 65 Million Steem in the Market? Steem would be worthless.

Whether proxy.token vote is legit backing of Sun or a protest vote, the end is the same. The Steem Blockchain will die and your investment will have no value.

SCT community, become part of the solution. Your voice is louder than ever. Back the original Witnesses.
@gadrian(76)· 2365d
On your first point, the vote on SPS proposals FOR and AGAINST the reduction of the powerdown period from 13 weeks to 4 weeks (not under a week!) was split relatively 50-50%.

You are asking for a less than a week power down period. And I see many conceded to 7 days.

Maybe that will be well received by many. But it will also have a large opposition. See the vote split above!

Just saying...
@melinda010100(80)· 2365d
I'm confused. The Korean Community is willing to kill Steem so that they can have bid bots back?
@roelandp(78)· 2365d

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

I am open to discussions to lower it further (mind you the powerdown had changed from 2 years to 13 weeks) however I want to prevent too much "fast food voting" where investors come & go and just move to steem for some botvoting for a week and move out again. I'd consider that raping the reward pool and destructive to the community.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

If used for its intended reasons it is a great way to curate or anti-curate content. If abused it is an annoyance. Removing down-voting alltogether might fix a lot of drama's :)

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

I am not certain the Steem chain is really optimized for executing smart contracts. Curious what you are thinking of and/or missing specifically.

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

Again, I'm curious to learn more about this. If it's about unlocking encrypted content only to those paying... Interesting and could be a nice business model!

With regards, @roelandp 루 란 피 드림
@crokkon(69)· 2365d
.
@mindtrap(75)· 2365d
Despite our differences you guys are also Steem stakeholders. Some of you big ones.

Aren’t you concerned that your investment might go down the toilet? Just look at Justin’s methods...

He only cares about his personal growth. Not you not me and definitely not Steem.

If you are uncertain of what you should do simply do nothing. There might not be Steem at all after this vote of yours...

Reconsider
@jeffjagoe(77)· 2365d
it's an absolute shame to see the @sct / South Korean community side with the destruction of STEEM
@torrey.blog(59)· 2365d
Please help retain at least 4 community witnesses to prevent sock puppets from holding a supermajority.
@dmitrydao(68)· 2365d
It's great to see that we started a conversation with Korean community. I know you have thousands of people behind proxy.token and we have to respect their opinion as well. Each culture has its own differences and sometimes it's hard to find a good compromise that will suit everyone.

We do need to work together to make sure that the chain is not centralized, censorship-resistant and always up-to-date with new features that all of the users want and need.

With regards to the questions, on behalf of my witness at least I should say the following:
1. The power-down period can and should be shortened. But due to technical and security concerns, it should be at least 7 days. That is something everyone agreed upon.
2. I was never a fan downvotes, I've never used them and have no plans to do so. I think it is something that prevents freedom of speech.
3. Smart Contracts can be implemented by I'm not sure if there's a need for that. Steem works perfectly as it is right now, and that's one of the reasons we have so many apps built on Steem. In general, there's a proposals system that people can use to build smart contracts on top of Steem blockchain itself, so I think it's possible.
4. Subscription or revenue model is a must for every business to stay alive, as long as it doesn't prevent the free usage if Steem blockchain itself. We can have business models on top of what we already have. Otherwise, this has to be decided by the majority of witnesses like always.
@gerber(64)· 2365d
lets just break price feed for few weeks XD.

(The Steemit acquired by Tron reveals its future plans in an open letter.)

Wondering who will code stuff for Justin and how long it will take :)
@quochuy(78)· 2365d

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

Yes, but 7 days is too short 6 - 4 weeks sounds more reasonable.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

To be negotiated and planned. Other witnesses suggestions are interesting but there might be other aspects to be thought of.

Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM blockchain?

Yes, I'm supporting this idea as I believe it will add value to the chain by giving more opportunities to developers.

Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?

Yes, if you are thinking allowing the chain to become a kind of decentralised Patreon. Content could be stored on the chain but access is restricted. Developing this on-chain instead of in dApp is an initial investment that can save time and money from projects owners who can then focus their effort on their product rather than the technical aspect of implementing the subscription model.
@aschatria(66)· 2365d
You are not only supporting the dictatorship with your reluctant opportunistic behavior, but you are trying to convey an open blackmail to an entire community - I thought that JustinE CunT is a rock bottom, now I see I was wrong - if karma gets her grabby hands on your mortal flash you will be the rain worm for the rest of eternity. Good luck with this shit, you will really need it.
@flauwy(74)· 2365d
I hope we can come together as a community with this. As you hopefully know, we are coming together daily currently on the MSP Discord server and discuss in long town hall meetings how to deal with this situation.

If you vote for the Justin Sun/Tron witnesses, you basically vote for centralization. If the Korean community wasn't heard enough before, than you are welcome to join the discussion and actually be part of what is happening.
@thecryptodrive(70)· 2365d
Hi thanks for your post, I hereby confirm my stance as follows:
1. (Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )
I am willing to shorten to 4 weeks as per the steemproposal I made, this gives a healthy balance to security and funds availability as well as prevents mass dumping on the market. You supported this proposal if you recall, but you never voted my witness when you decided to vote for a couple, I was very surprised and disheartened that you didn't because I was fighting for the very same lower powerdown times that you wanted and voted for.
1. Not right now, this is a massive change and there are no steemit devs left to code it, I do believe the free downvote pool is unfair and leads to downvote abuse, it also makes it a double deduction for example if you upvote something else you move rewards away from everything else, but by downvoting a particular post and upvoting something else at the same time, that post is extra penalised. Downvoting is needed to stop abuse otherwise the reward pool could be drained my malicious parties, but I don't believe in the free downvote pool. My business is heavily affected by it and I actually commented on your last post that I understand how it feels to be downvoted because I recently suffered the same, you didn't respond to me.
2. Smart contracts, yes! I agree that if we had smartcontracts we could do some fancy pegging of SBD to become more of an algo token like DAI, also SMT's without smart contracts are less appealing than other tokens on EOS, ETH or TRON that have that option if needed. If SMT's are going to compete with other chains then smart contracts should be added.
In the end none of this can be achieved with the current state of Steem, ex Steemit devs refuse to work for Justin and the only way is to get them back and get paid directly by the DAO they won't come back and build as long as the centralised witnesses are in place, and the longer we leave it the quicker we will lose them to other outside job opportunities.
@netuoso(72)· 2365d

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

Yes. Shortest should be 7 days in my opinion.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

Downvotes should be able to be removed from communities with SMTs. Not from the main chain. There's a compromise to be had there.

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

Yes. Would you support a dev proposal for such work?

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

Potentially. I don't know what you mean by this but increasing revenue for users is a good thing to me.
@stoodkev(72)· 2365d

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

At most 7 days. Less than 7 days means you can Power Down Power Up and vote within the time of payout of a post, that has many security issues coming with it.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

I agree with @arcange, I d agree to remove both upvotes and downvotes at Steem level and move it SMTs built on top of communities.

Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain?

Steem already works via smart contracts, do you mean the possibility to add custom ones to the blockchain? Sure.

Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?

You mean at the blockchain level? That can already be done at application level with encryption and a paywall. But yea, why not.
@marki99(62)· 2365d
What do you mean by paid subscription?

Pay a subscription to get a Steem account?

Also, did you consider that removing downvotes from Steem will allow bidbots to come back?
@arcange(79)· 2365d

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

No. Maybe shorter than the actual 13 weeks, but not 7 or 3 days.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

Yes, but only with similar upvote policy removal. Both mechanisms should be transferred into communities, using their own SMT and their own pool, so you can milk yourself but not the global reward pool.

Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain?

Steem is already a smart contract, isn't it?

Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?

Why should we introduce a subscription model? Create your own business, on top of the blockchain, with or without a subscription.
@will-richards(47)· 2365d
거래소는 투표를 위해 고객 자금을 훔쳤습니다. 그들은 당신을 더 빨리 속이고 싶어합니다. 도둑을 숨길 수 있습니다.

Posted using Partiko Android
@dalz(81)· 2365d
You should leave the status quo with 4 community witnesses.

Also this looks like blackmail. Quite unethical.
@mcfarhat(71)· 2365d
Hey @sct, @proxy.token team. It seems you already moved in a direction with the new tron imposed witnesses without giving time to chat to the old community selected witnesses.

To clarify to you the situation a bit further, we are at a stance that could make or break the steem blockchain. There are clearly malicious actions taking place from tron side to overtake the steem blockchain which started in coordination with exchanges as well, with the real intent is to simply move steemit as a dapp to tron and without any real plans for steem as a blockchain. This jeopardizes the existance of the blockchain itself. This is why our community and witnesses and pushing to ensure the blockchain is controlled by the community, not a single entity imposing tron's intentions, which is at the core of how decentralized systems are intended to function. In terms of your questions, and while we cannot respond on behalf of the community or the witnesses, yet we can at least confirn our vision altogether to grow and improve the blockchain in itself, including SMTs(smart contracts) and creating further growth roadmaps. The time now is to work on ensuring the survival of steem blockchain and creating a better community-induced growth to it. In the worst case, and should you still believe that the whole community stands differently than the way you perceive things, and as we believe you would intend for the whole ecosystem to grow, and if you sense you are undecided as to how to proceed, i would suggest removing your current votes so as not to tilt the balance to any side.
@glory7(76)· 2365d
증인들이 이거 대답해줄지 의문이군요... 지금 골든타임이 지나가는듯.
@twinpapa(74)· 2365d
이것 좀 확인 부탁 드려요.아무것도 들어오질 않아서요.물어 볼 곳이 없어서 여기에 작성했어요.

TRANSACTION 2020. 3. 2. 오후 5:47:00

Transaction ID: 065c9120f6f842345a4e55f9c523cb14c961d609

Sidechain Block: 5674175

From: @twinpapa To: @sctm.burn

Amount: - 23 SCTM
@hyokhyok(72)· 2365d
30투표->1투표 변화 는 없네요 ㅎㅎ 이것도 얼른 되어야 담합을 막을수있을것같습니다
@knight4sky(61)· 2365d
저스틴하고 직접 컨택을 해서 제안하는게 더 나아 보입니다. 밥팅들 대답 기다리느니...
@new-jersey(71)· 2365d
파워다운기간 단축을 위해서 져스틴계정으로 투표를!! 거기에 스마트컨트랙까지~
@epscu(66)· 2366d
투표한번한다고 변경 못하는거 아니지 않나요? 선조치 후생각...

Posted using Partiko iOS
@bluengel(71)· 2366d
참고로 themarkymark 증인 반대합니다~! 다운보팅과 글로벌블랙리스트 사익을 위해 운영 온갖 더러운 짓 다 하는~!

블루엔젤 포스팅 참조하시면 반대 사유 있습니다~!

Posted using Partiko Android
@naha(74)· 2366d
당장,,, 다운보팅 없애는 것만 얻어내도 큰 성과일 것 같습니다.
@oldstone.sct(56)· 2366d
유료구독모델은 여기서 다룰 문제는 아닌 듯합니다.