VOTING NOW CLOSED - Foundation Structure Proposal Election - UPDATE: NO REGISTRATION REQUIRED

in #dpoll2 years ago (edited)

votenow.png

ATTENTION IMPORTANT CHANGES TO THE ELECTION:


1. NO REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED TO VOTE -

All Steem Users, whether they registered previously or not, can vote in this election. (scroll down to cast your vote - be sure to read each proposal).

Due to feedback from the community as well as concern that even though the need to register to vote was announced well in advance, it could have not been as clearly understood as it needed to be. This would possibly result in lower participation in this election and even though we had original reasons behind implementing the registration process, we felt (based on community feedback) that those benefits did not outweigh the cons of less of the community being involved in this decision. REGISTRATION IS NO LONGER REQUIRED.

2. ELECTION DATES EXTENDED - APRIL 10TH - APRIL 24TH (9:10 PM UTC)

Making a change in the middle of a process is never ideal, but we felt this was the best decision to ensure the community's voice is heard. Because of the change though, we will be extending the Election Vote end date by one week (April 24th). Hopefully this will ensure everyone has enough time to understand the changes in the process as well as ample time to review the proposal options below and make an informed decision.

Thank you.

Steem Alliance Structure Proposal Election

The deadline for voting is 14 days from the post, or around 21:10 (9:10pm) UTC on April 24th.

To see results with correct filters, click here

The final structure proposals can be found here, and will now be put up for vote.

There was also a contest to write up comparisons for the final structure proposals which you can find here with many excellent analyses.

Summary of Choices

(Presented in alphabetical order)

"Decentralized Steem Incubator" Submitted By @alexvan

Main focus shall be the development of new self sustainable projects, being it business, NGOs or personal individual projects on the Steem blockchain.

https://steemit.com/foundationproposal/@alexvan/steem-foundation-a-decentralized-steem-incubator-for-the-future-proposal-v2-0




"DeCentraSteem" Submitted By @impactn

DeCentraSteem, a decentralised structure made of a network of ever-changing self-organised working circles. One purpose, strengthening communities, and nine rules make it work without a central board.

https://steemit.com/foundationproposal/@impactn/decentrasteem-final-proposal-for-a-decentralised-structure-in-favour-of-communities-on-stee




"Foundation Structure Proposal" Submitted By @upheaver

The goal of this proposal is to create and grow a sustainable ecosystem around Steem blockchain and to make Steem the leading blockchain for decentralized apps and communities worldwide.

The proposal features a robust fiat based management structure, fundraising through corporate and individual membership fees, various types of funding activities and on-chain advisory role for Steem community.

https://github.com/pauliusuza/steem-alliance




"The Merger" Submitted By @shadowspub

The goal of this proposal is to combine some of the best ideas put forward and work alongside Steemit Inc to build the most beneficial Community Foundation possible, through collaboration. The Foundation will be where community members, investors, developers, and influencers come together to advance the Steem ecosystem and underlying technology.

https://steemit.com/foundationproposal/@shadowspub/foundation-proposal-the-merger




"People Survive By Supporting Each Other" Submitted by @TheHive

Investment of Steem in FIAT industry is what will bring an assurancce of the demand for Steem. Creating industry and a chain owned (not privately owned) company in the FAT world providing local services provides an opportunity to have Steem used in a concentrated environment. As opposed to being used across continents. Growing hubs or localities that later can join and support each other. The growth of the Chain and the benefits of using it get amplified with compound growth over time, Reducing the reliance on and the influence of entities outside of the Chain. Let's Build it together.

https://steemit.com/thealliance/@thehive/i-made-a-proposal




Election Details

  • The Election will run for 7 days (final day being April 17th)
  • Voting Method will be stake weight with a cap at 250k More Details Here.
  • You must vote using the dpoll interface.
  • You can select multiple options to indicate approval for multiple choices.
  • You can see the current tally by selecting 'SA Stake Based Voting' as the result layout and 'steemalliance' as the community in the list of filters.
  • Once submitted, you cannot change your vote!

How To Ensure Fairness

The goal of this group from the beginning has been to be transparent, fair and accountable to the community. ALL transcripts from the inception can be found on chain and/or within The Steem Alliance Discord Server. There are no closed rooms, it all can be seen right there.

Due to feedback we have received we want to ensure this election has another level of transparency and accountability.

The election will have open audit logs (just like the working group election did) and will be released (just like before).

We ask that each Proposal Team form a group to review the election audits, as well as anyone from the community as well. This way there will be multiple eyes on the results, reviewing and ensuring fairness is achieved.

This election will be decided by the community vote, not the working group.

  • The community will decide.
  • In case of tie, there will be a run off election.

The working group (or anyone involved in the proposals) will vote just like everyone else. Their vote will be weighed based on the method detailed above. This is a community election.

Open audits will be available, we hope many groups step up to review them.

YOU MUST VOTE AT dPoll

Which structure proposal(s) do you support for the Steem Alliance?

You may select more than 1, and once submitted, you cannot change your vote!


  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver


  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Answer the question at dpoll.xyz.

Sort:  

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Does anyone actually think that this bullshit is any different from all the other bullshit steemit inc has told you? GO SMTS BABY!

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Ich auch.

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

So you can vote for several options but not for none?

Posted using Partiko Android

You dont need to vote if you are voting for none.

If you want to vote for another option, the time for submission of proposals has passed.

Posted using Partiko Android

If you don't support any of the options, the thing to do would be to not vote.

But then I could have also not registered?

Posted using Partiko Android

Maybe they should do a second round with the top of this first round and an extra option to vote against both options?

We'll see what happens.

You could just write a comment with a single hashtag for H1 to make it huge and ask for 0.1% upvotes from people who choose none of the above then count the vests. For people to cheap to upvote 0.1%, you can allow comment votes

Posted using Partiko Android

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

I tried to focus on likelihood of success in advancing Steem in cryptoland and attracting investors and meaningful projects.

Here is my analysis for anybody interested.

Voted for

  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Good luck everyone!

Voted for

  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn
  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn
  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

Voted for

  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

Voted for

  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn
  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

I think this project ideology is closest to my own, The question asked is who would I show support to. Supporting myself holds too much bias. I know it can succeed too. Of the other 4 proposals , I would support Incubator 1st.

Why aren't you voting for yourself as well?

and why am I not using all the accounts I have control over to vote too?

Cause it would make no difference, Even the blind can do Mathematics. Capping the vote at 250K to make the voting so called fair is a joke, when the cap is based on 1 Million user base and the active user base is 10K. The majority of the voting from the lower accounts is gone, The voting from all the large accounts is still present. Everything seems designed for an already chosen party to vote. The project to be selected to win will be the one made by those who were asked to be overseer's of the selection process. Everything screams in house, cloak and dagger.

A pyramid is being set up to control the foundation, A pyramid that feeds the top or private industry not the chain.

My own goals have been reached by expanding those that have heard about the concept I have proposed for over 1 year now.

actually the 250k cap is on SP held. Reducing the influence of the higher stake holders spreads the influence out to more of the community. The number of accounts held on the platform is irrelevant.

I have been watching the difference in rankings between full stake and capped stake. There is a difference and it doesn't work in any particular groups favour except as influenced by the incoming votes. The impact has moved back and forth as the votes have come in.

on SP held is also including non active accounts.

I see. I don't know if 250k was the right level to cut it off, but its an interesting mechanism: stake 'to a certain point'.

I decided to vote with some of my accounts, even though it might not change the outcome. Voting is more of a social orient that a results orient for me anyway - at least 'in real life' I'm used to voting for the loveable losers.

You can actually compare the numbers through the filters on dpoll and no matter if you look at account voting (one vote per account), pure stake or the cap we focused on.. the results currently are the same.

The end result will be interesting to compare and use as an example for possible future voting and decision making etc. But currently, popular vote (one account/one vote) and the stake options are showing pretty close results. So, was there some other reason you felt differently? Or did you not look?

As far as the rest of your comment, I call bullshit. Everything is out in the open and nothing has been predecided.

This is an open election to get an idea of what the community would like to see this foundation be. The whole community.. because even if you think everyone who owns stake is evil in your eyes, they are also part of this community.

ALL community members matter and are voting in this election.

This isn’t leadership, it’s an idea of what type of foundation should be built. Then that idea will have to be implemented and will evolve over what is actually possible.

Everything has been open and transparent through this process by those selected (by the community) to “oversee” it. If you don’t want to support it, don’t. That’s your choice, but leave your bullshit at the door as there is no truth in it and it’s not beneficial for anyone.. especially the community.

Let's not go to the open and transparent while discussions behind closed chat rooms take place.

Everyone who holds a stake is not evil in my eyes. I read you as defensive and not of discussion. This can only be due to your own actions. Not the words I spoke. You are obviously not open to the possibility people do not all see the same thing in the same way.

Everyone else can have a point of view but me eh?

You do not have to agree with an opinion I form, You should be mature enough to accept I do not see everything the same way you do.

You're wasting your time mate

You could be right on that.

Or maybe I am not wasting it, and Simply sharing an idea. if others can grasp the size and rewards for the community from this concept, Then maybe the maybe turns around to maybe we can do this together.

I’m open to all discussion and was replying to your opinion that this process does not allow the community’s voice to be heard (as the numbers say otherwise) and call be on the accusations of those involved.

I’m sure many conversations happen privately all over discord and Steem, it’s called private messaging. All actions of the working group and Steem Alliance have been done in the open discord server. That is what I was pointing out, and it can be clearly seen for anyone who wants to look.

I do not believe people need to see things the same way as me and actually work pretty hard to ensure all opinions are heard and considered, even if I don’t agree with them. I will most definitely state when something is not factual though, if it pertains to something I’m involved in.. which is what I was doing. Stating your comment was not factual. Then I said you could support it or not, as that is your choice.

Opinions are great and always welcome, opinions based on facts are those that are the most beneficial though, for everyone.

Yes and about you all just put your own proposal together and ignore the rest. I heard about that.

The discussion an opinion bring is what counts not the opinion. All opinions no matter from when where or who they come from should be held equal.

If you cannot see how this opinion came about from the facts I hear about you saying to do your own proposal and skip the nonsense. How the post was published while you had ample opportunity to inform the rest of the community during a show that you had the intention to do so.

That you feel justified to override the community itself says so much. Which is basically what the committee to form a committee has done. not guide the process but be the process.

This again is just opinion. Everything I write is an opinion of mine generally.

Is debate really necessary?
Was it really necessary to attack me in your reply to begin with.
From that point onward it mattered not what you wrote. I held no respect for you from that attack.

I didn’t attack at all, in fact the opposite. There is no “let’s make our own and ignore the rest”, that is a silly statement. I gave input on a proposal, many actually, and have been extremely open about that.

Giving input on a proposal does not mean the others don’t count, as it’s up to the community to decide which idea they prefer, which is the point of this open election.

Even if I decided to make my own completely separate proposal (which I did think about), it still would be up to the community. More proposals give them more options, not less.

So, as I said, your opinion seems to be based on personal frustrations and not any factual events.

The goal here is to build the best foundation possible, with the best ideas brought forward, not to “win”.

More proposals, more collaborations and more ideas mean more options for the community and therefore a better end product.

The community is now giving their consensus on which idea they prefer, nothing more, nothing less.

It’s not pre-decided and there is no cloak and dagger, what you see is what you get.

If you don’t like the process, that’s fair. The volunteer group did their best, maybe it will be a learning experience for the community as a whole.

Have a good day.

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Why did you downvote my post

Voted for

i think this is a great initiative and best for implementation. you got my support

Voted for

Voted for

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

Voted for

  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

Voted for

  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Thank you.

Proposal to postpone voting until non-steemconnect voting has been made an option.

I want to pose that @steemaliance should take it upon herself to avoid becoming a self amplifying loop of security-illiteracy, and excluding stake holders, especially larger stake holders, who won't trust their active key to SteemConnect in order to be able to vote.

For those of us who don't use steemconnect or don't use steemconnect with an account holding a larger account of their total stake, the requirement to vote in a stake-based election is I believe a security nightmare.

I want to pose that the requirement to use steemconnect in order to vote creates a huge barrier to voting, and excludes those stake holders that choose to protect their assets by either not using steemconnect at all, or only using it from an account that has no access to much of the users assets.

For this reason I feel voting at this moment creates a dangerous division and filtering of steem users, especially as @steemaliance might turn out to make decisions in the future that might affect platform security. Do we really want the platform shaped by the security-illiterate segment of stake holders with a high enough stake to shape these kinds of votes?

Please vote on this proposal by doing a 1% upvote of one of the below options:

  • Option 1: Steem Aliance should go ahead with the vote, STFU about security illiteracy, use steemconnect.
  • Option 2 : Steem Alliance should postpone all votes until a way has been devised for those who choose (for legitimate reasons) to not trust steemconnect with their active key.

Fair point concerning the active key. We are discussing this now.

My idea is simply to publish 5 steemalliance comments corresponding to the options and allowing those that don't want to use dpoll to cast votes on them. I have concocted a very primitive dashboard that merges the dpoll data and the voting data from 5 designated comments to show the results. And I have something ready to show the merged data / results, as I was playing with it just now.

Option 2 : Steem Alliance should postpone all votes until a way has been devised for those who choose (for legitimate reasons) to not trust steemconnect with their active key.

Give this option a 1% upvote if you agree.

Take my stake weighted vote

Option 1: Steem Aliance should go ahead with the vote, STFU about security illiteracy, use steemconnect.

Give this option a 1% upvote if you agree.

Just move all your liquid steem to an alt, route it through an exchange and it will be hard for people to know you have it. it doesn't affect staked voting anyway.
You can also just delegate all of your sp to an account too. That's not possible to hide, but then again powering down is slow so why bother?

Posted using Partiko Android

Voted for

🎁 Dear @singhcapital,

SteemBet Seed round SPT sale is about to start in 2 days!

When our started the development of SteemBet Dice game, we couldn’t imagine that our game would go so viral and that SteemBet would become one of the pioneers in this field.

In order to give back to our beloved community, we’ll distribute 4000 STEEM to SPT holders immediately after Seed sale. Plus, investors in this earliest round will be given 60% more tokens as reward and overall Return on Investment is estimated at 300%!

Join the whitelist on SteemBet webiste now and start investing! Feel free to ask us anything on Discord https://discord.gg/tNWJEAD

spt-sale-2-day.jpg

Voted for

Voted for

I like some aspects of @thehive proposal. Would encourage winning proposal to consider putting some concepts to a try.

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn

you lost me at "rules" ... i'll check back for the results :)

assuming this is not binding in any sort like when parliament would hold a referendum my main concern would be how this affects individuals as not everyone is used to working in circles and some work best by themselves ...

anyway ....i think its too late as it says 17th but any initiative where connection, convergence and synergy with the "old" fiat world is promoted and tinkered on would probably have my support, face it wether you like it or not : at the end of the day you buy bread with dollar

and without bottom input any financial/economic system is bound to fail

  • any proposal involving forced networking or forcing people into prefab stramine on how to do things and how to handle their accounts i would probably be against since any kind of fascism opposes de-centralization and telling yourself decentralization works only from a level of minimum 50 people per node is just that, so

at least i left my two cents

i would also move for the removal of negative voteweight so content paladins and trolls are left with nothing to do unless they learn how to create instead of destroy

very nice and all that, allow me to make a second comment at the risk of being trolled since it seems i wasnt done talking yet

  • i see people worried about the security, basically if you only use the master key once to jot the other keys down no one can do much even if they had them unless you keep a lot of liquid or seriously dont pay attention to a high value account for several days in a row
  • if you want an example of how to interconnect without steemconnect or steemkeys you can check the game im working on - with no e.t.a. or promises made mind you
  • and then : i hate getting into politics so i try to keep it short, if any idea fits someone can take it up and propagate it, i already mentioned removal of negative voteweight but
  • as i am great O-ponent of one account per person i am a great PRO-ponent of one REGISTERED account per person - not mandatory, but- :
    you get one free account which costs steemit 15 sp in delegation until filled (plenty of ways to check up on this : an account that still has only the 15 sp in it after 300 days might get a warning and be un-delegated after that for instance, plenty of ways there) but one CAN has -lolcatspeak ys- as many accounts as one wants, which cant be a problem as you have to provide the steempower for those YOURSELF or youre left with like so many acounts with zero in it ... which makes zero difference to the whole as such and also has zero impact - but leaves a lot of room to implement different methods to work with
    however (and yes i do have multiple accounts and basically almost everyone i know has that - including the main witnesses and steemit itself for all i know) BUT - theres the point: witness votes - i say . if you CHOOSE to cast a witness vote you get only one per person, meaning you can have 30 different witnesses or whatever but not 10 accounts voting 30 times on witnesses each , SO

without interfering in the freedom of the market and creative use of resources , politics is a different thing - if you live in the states i think you need to register to vote as well for instance (not here, here you are obliged by law - if they didnt do that no one would show up as its all a scam on higher levels hahah hah haa) - so its VOLUNTARY (<== huge requirement if you want to pretend to be shin-sekai)
you choose to register one account that has the power to vote on witnesses and your precious laws and changes here , but you keep the rest working as is, that way you get a representative number, i havent checked , but about a year ago there were 1.1 million accounts (which is peanuts compared to the bigguns) - how do you get a representative number? thats hard, but if you have registered voters (allow me to stress : ONLY for witness and decision votes) you get at least a modicum of usable statistic, if it turns out 100 people are making your decisions your democracy aint working

and no shame in it either : its voluntary , you dont HAVE to give up anonimity unless you want decision rights, right ?
gud .... brings me to another thing which i might not have read correctly (i think im already doing overtime here for the pay involved...)
membership fees
bad idea , thats elitist and turns the place into a little club and you dont need arguments there, you can just look at FB and Google, the big ones got that big by a) giving it all away for free, b) ad money and c) instead of a trending section where alleged marketeers explain how its done by upvoting themselves you can have said super-salesmen work to bring in major brandname accounts who would be competing for steempower as for instance pepsi couldnt have having LESS sp than coca cola (to name just a simple potential situation) and the account itself is already revenue even before they put up ads

that said, i feel i said so much i said too much

as i seriously dont like getting into politics as i live in the bubble universe and am not really into classic networking (as are most of the people who developed the foundations we are all standing on today : they never did much handshake-day but they gave you and me everything we revolve around here now ....)

whew :)

Voted for

Voted for

  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub
  • “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

Voted for

Voted for

Voted for

  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn

"People Survive By Supporting Each Other" Submitted by @TheHive

"Decentralized Steem Incubator" Submitted By @alexvan

Voted for

Voted for

Voted for

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub

Voted for

  • “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
  • “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn

After reading through the proposals. I realized that these have some great well thought out ideas which have a potential of taking steem to another level.

Voted for

Voted for