You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Statement from the @blockbrothers #2.

Exclaiming you were right doesn't make you right. The only precedent the witnesses set was that they will protect the blockchain when presented with an existential threat, and I'm glad they did.

In addition to an underlying skepticism that Ned would care enough to do a deal that actually takes into account the community's interests, Justin's own INITIAL actions toward the community were clearly not a good sign. Among other things, he confused Steemit with Steem, talked about swapping STEEM for TRX, migrating dApps, he showed that he clearly had NO IDEA that Steemit's STEEM stake had obligations attached, and he didn't even respond to meeting requests (like, seriously?). This forced the witnesses to act defensively such that nothing crazy would happen.

That's a perfectly reasonable and in fact responsible action considering the circumstances. ESPECIALLY considering that we're not talking about just ANY stake here. We're talking about Steemit's ninja-mined stake which, due to the attached obligations, is CLEARLY a special case.

So please stop pretending the action taken by witnesses has wider meaning and somehow looms over Steem forever. And stop comparing this perfectly reasonable action to the highly unethical action JS took by colluding with exchanges to usurp user stake and lock it up for 13 weeks in order to hijack the network with illegitimately voted sockpuppet witness nodes. Such comparisons are not intellectually honest.

And btw, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that not only was the action taken by witnesses reasonable and responsible, but also that Justin's response PROVED that the concerns witnesses had to begin with were WELL FOUNDED. We now know what JS is capable of. If the witnesses had not acted, in a few months we'd very likely be EXACTLY where we are now, except that JS would be far more prepared to force his will upon the community.

Let's not be so naive, please. Thanks.

Sort:  

Justin expected pushover centralized trash like LINO that he easily assimilated. What he got was a bunch of angry idealist that wouldnt take his shit.

Idealists that only think in codes and have literally no understanding of how humans respond to threats.

Did we really think he'd sit back and watch us freeze his stake and dictate the terms to him?

This post stated the obvious truth. Enough time should have been given for a dialogue.
It's amazing how people keep talking about what Justin did, as if that's all that happened.

Also, look at the person's history: Former Employees Sue Justin Sun and TRON Foundation, Alleging Workplace Hostilities. This isn't his first acquisition after which employees have resigned.

These are fucking sacrosanct words!! In my opinion you guys have been too good!! Person like him doesn't deserve nothing!!

doesn't deserve nothing!!

I don't think he deservers everything.

:p

ahahahha is the double negation the problem with my sentence?
ok ok so i repeat it for a better understanding:
"he deserves nothing!! The only thing that he deserve is getting out from here!!

Exclaiming you were right doesn't make you right. The only precedent the witnesses set was that they will protect the blockchain when presented with an existential threat, and I'm glad they did.

A threat that has existed since this chain's inception, and they didn't really pay attention to it because they had a few accounts who pretty much guaranteed the top 20 positions.

Essentially, nothing changed. Just leadership of the biggest stakeholder company on here. Right then it became okay for the witnesses to 'protect the chain'. Foul play.

Yep, this part here triggered me as well.

Using exchanges for this purpose is equally unacceptable.