I don't quite understand how it would be completely our fault if we have little control over the changes that are made to the blockchain?
They can hardfork the platform but can they hardfork our brains? I guess it's about taking lemons and making lemonade. I broke it down really well in this post but just know there's sometimes a difference between me talking here and me on stage. Don't let something like the title scare you away. No matter what they change, it's still up to all of us to make things work.
I see that you’re 100% against bidbots, as am I, but what is your stance on curation teams and delegating to such? I think one fix to the fork, done by the community, would be curation teams redistributing the increased curation rewards to authors. Thoughts on this?
Concentrating SP into fewer hands could lead to more rewards next to the post, but fewer eyes on the prize.
I'll often see curation teams earn far more on their daily update post which highlight what has been voted for than what the posts earn for receiving votes from said curation team. Without mentioning names, I can say there's one that'll come sprinkle many votes on my post for a total of about 20 cents. So there's many accounts without eyes, not paying much, then announcing the fact they were there, but I think it's an automated message. So in this instance if they could clean up their act and make it look like less of a ruse, I'd probably support it.
In general though, I don't have a problem with any in existence today and do respect their efforts if they're acting responsibly.
Delegation, in general, I'm not a fan of. I can see it being beneficial to large stakeholders but when I'm seeing small accounts all concentrating wealth into fewer hands, we then lose our market. I'd sooner perform in front of a sold out theater rather than in front of a table of representatives.