As per title, how do you decide on witnesses and what makes you place your vote or remove your vote from them?
There was quite some discussion, which often resurfaces, in a chat recently about expectation from witnesses, if the rewards they receive are fair, etc, so I and some others were curious to see what other stakeholders expect from them. This isn't meant to be taken personally by anyone or attempt to change your current witness list, just a general feel for how people view the block producer job of Hive.
This might be a bit difficult to put into a poll, so please excuse me if I'm not doing this the best way, but I figured giving people the choice to vote on as many of the choices as possible might give readers an idea of what people find important, even if some of the choices are naturally more important than others.
Feel free to comment your opinion on the choices as well. I'll give some of my thoughts behind the choices and what encompasses them.
Trusted personas that keep the chain safe
- People, whether doxed or not, you trust have the chains and its fundamentals best in mind and will protect it from outside attacks. (Not many examples here but I guess most of us were around before the hive fork and what occurred)
Produce blocks reliably
- Their witnesses don't often randomly miss blocks, crash, etc, have at least a couple instances running (back ups, local, etc)
Actively test upcoming code changes
- Testing of code before major hardforks, making sure no bugs occur that may halt the chain and are around to make sure the forks go through smoothly
Build things on chain without special funding'
- this basically means that they're building things for the sake of hive and its users and potentially their witness position, not something that's being funded privately/through delegations/the DHF
Are active socially
- As a social media platform, it's nice to see the human-side of block producers and feels motivational to see them being active like everyone else through low and high prices
Attempt to advertise hive
- They actively attempt to bring traffic to our platform in one way or another
HBD APR, account costs, block size
- You agree with their decision on the HBD APR, how much hive an account should burn to be created, size of Hive blocks set by witnesses
I decided to leave this poll as "number of votes" rather than stake interpretation, maybe it'd be a good idea to do the other version as well after this poll and potentially with the choices more fine-tuned after feedback. Do let me know what you think.
The main task for witnesses is to produce blocks. Without blocks being produced chain does not work. And yes, missed block, even from top witness, is not that big deal, but many missed blocks lower the security of the chain. It is not a coincidence that there are mechanisms to turn off the chain when too many blocks are missed (from many witnesses). There are other essential tasks for witnesses, like publishing feed (again, feed turns off if witnesses don't refresh it regularly).
Another very important task is to know what they are running. Changes in core code influence how the chain works. Witnesses take responsibility for that, so they should be aware of all the changes that are introduced with hardforks. Yes, it requires very different set of skills compared to node maintenance. They might need to hire specialists or spend countless hours tracking the changes, and the task is not even easy for people that are actively developing that code. At the very least witnesses must take part in testing.
Sometimes unexpected things happen. Top witnesses are similar to upper management in the corporation. Track record is what makes them different from "young blood" that would want to take their place. When someone took part in leading the chain through many hardships, it adds to their value as a witness.
As for secondary parameters such as HBD APR, I'd rather see mechanisms changed to something that would move the power away from witnesses-politicians to market forces. However until such changes are made, it is also an important factor.
For everything else - no. We could expect those things from witnesses if Hive price was in high double or triple digits. In such environment being top witness would mean you employ a diverse team of PR specialists, admins and software engineers, product managers, sales people etc.
This one is really, really tricky.
Just by virtue of arriving on the chain first, many of the top witnesses were thrust into the position you just described, and rode it out, sure, but its more coincidence it happened on their watch and the timing of their arrivals that caused it, than prior experience.
There are MANY backup lower level witnesses who were here for those things, involved in helping mitigate them, code for them, whatever might have been happening.
You just couldn't "see" them, because they were merely mid-tier witnesses and don't get the notoriety or reach / visibility of people talking about them in posts or comments or weren't even witnesses yet at all during events such as "the forkening" or whatever.
And there are some non-20 who WERE top 20s then who aren't anymore, even if they deserve to be based on effort, passion, caring about the chain and people and so on, @TimCliff is a PRIME example of that. But he never played the pander-to-whales game so I suppose he eventually got shifted downward. I don't know. Maybe he burned out and let go a little, maybe real life got in the way, lots of possibilities for shifts over 8 years - not mine to say or speculate on.
But the fact someone was in place when a thing happened, doesn't mean they were there just on merit. MANY are and were, some others up there, not so much at all.
So its an interesting criteria, but one with a lot of vectors and considerations to be fully made into a "whole" holistic criteria.
In terms of the reason I am no longer in the top 20, at the time of the Steem/Hive split - I would not vote in favor of freezing the Steemit, Inc. tokens. I have always maintained the position that witnesses should not be getting in the business of freezing user tokens, unless it was specifically to address an issue of chain security. I knew at the time it would cost me my witness spot, but I was OK "dying" on that hill. My post on the topic is here.
I also created my own version of the fork code that would still allow them access to their tokens, but would prevent them from using them to vote on witnesses. I posted about it here. It was not enough for the stakeholders who wanted to completely "eliminate" the Steemit, Inc. mined stake though, so I've been outside the top 20 since then.
This is exactly why you have been one of my Heroes here since the first day I learned anything about you at all, Tim.
No one can ever say that you are not always willing to stand up for principles and justice even if the justice serves someone or a group of someones who may not deserve it at all in the "eyes of society" -- but who still have rights that need defending.
Folks this is a man who has always been fastidious about freedom, personal property rights, justice for all and not for "just us" and of course, fastidious about having a very clean car interior. (learned during what is still the most legendary blockchain interview ever, and probably still on youtube somewhere recorded for posterity for over half a decade now)
One would think "they" could be rational enough to realize you would be just as stalwart at protecting THEIR assets if the tables were turned and theirs had been at risk in similar fashion but sometimes you really have to wonder about some of what seems to be considered rational around here.
Anyway, you know what Sir? As I understand it, dumb people think smart people are crazy people, and nice guys finish last. So the cliché's indicate the cards are stacked against the best of us sometimes.
What's heroic, is when you know the deck was marked against you, and you played all in anyway.
#LegendsOfTheChain
?
I wouldn't say majority wanted to eliminate it, the reason for the freeze was because they could easily just have withdrawn and vested it on other accounts to circumvent the non-witness voting block on the main account. What transpired after was even worse than anyone could've imagined in terms of security of the chain so I'd say it definitely was an issue of chain security.
Not trying to be rude here but seems you're remembering it quite different.
Hi @acidyo. Nice to hear from you again :) No, not rude. It's a valid question.
A lot was going on back then, and many things seem clearer on the other side of events looking back with hindsight. It is easy to look back now and say that they were clearly bad actors - but at the time all of this was going on they had not shown all their cards yet. There was evidence back then that they had some intention of making things work and working towards mutually beneficial goals. Decisions were made and paths were chosen though, so at this point there are a lot of things that theoretically could have played out differently but we will never know.
In the end I feel like everything worked out for the best, so I'm quite happy with that. Hive as a platform and community has exceeded anything that we would have been able to accomplish if we had not split.
I do remember the events at the time though regarding my own involvement and decision quite clearly. It literally cost me my top witness spot and it was an extremely difficult decision to make at the time.
You can see my quote in the post I made before I was voted out:
"I fully acknowledge and appreciate the severity of the situation, and fully understand why the witnesses running this software have chosen to do so. Personally however, I have chosen NOT to apply the changes to my witness node.
Regardless of the messy situation that got us here, and the very real security risk that Tron currently poses to our chain - I see them as a stakeholder who acquired their stake through a legitimate over-the-counter purchase, and I am not OK forcing restrictions on the way a stakeholder uses their stake."
There was a very clear objective from a lot of the large stakeholders to "eliminate the Steemit Inc Ninja Mined Stake". Not everyone held that view, but it was enough of a factor that it would not have been possible to maintain my top witness spot without supporting that objective.
The alternate fork that I ran on my witness node (link shared above) would have prevented the stake from being used to vote on witnesses. Ironically it would have done nothing to prevent the exchanges from doing so (which is what ultimately took over the chain) but it was a solution for the imminent threat that everyone was worried about. Yes, they could have powered it down and transferred it to another account - but at the time this was only meant to serve as a short-term "band aid" solution until a more diplomatic approach could be sought out, and a power down would have been something that we could have had at least a short amount of time to react to.
One of the other things I was suggesting before I was voted out was:
"We create a fork of Steem (similar to Ethereum vs Ethereum Classic) in a way that voids out the ninja mined stake (or does something with it such as funding the DAO) and we let Tron proceed with the chain they have full control of, and we proceed with a new chain without them."
It wasn't the way I envisioned it at the time I wrote the post, but that's basically what ended up happening in the end. At the time I was hoping we could find a way to all work together, but I had always seen a fork with a new chain as the next best alternative.
Okay, but there was also evidence and discussions about Justin having overthrown Tron's governance in the past to get his code through and that he actively planned to move steem over to tron and it only being a token on the network rather than its own coin which would've make the security of the chain even more questionable.
I'd say that evidence was more prominent than what you mention here
I was someone who at the time welcomed Tron and thought let's do what we can with the cards we were dealt, attempted to ignore his reputation in the space, etc, but when the time came where he'd throw those plans around in interviews and through his exchange, and his spokesperson barely acknowledged our fears of the future of the chain, he didn't give us many options. That said I don't agree with how you stated in the end of the comment that "we" wanted to completely eliminate the ninja-mined stake, if that was the case we would've probably done so when Hive was created. It also paints the picture that everyone who voted for the freeze was out to eliminate a giant supply of the token rather than wanting it to be used as had been made clear by the founders for years but never followed up on.
What it comes down to, in my opinion, is this, he was a sole actor with a lot of stake which he could control the network with, we were many block producers all over the world with different views, morals and visions of decentralization and freedom. Instead of trusting that the bp's who had kept the chain running for years wouldn't just flat out steal/eliminate his stake but demand gov to be left alone and the promise the founders had made with it to be followed, he decided to go on the offensive even harder (yes I admit the freeze was an offensive albeit more defensive move) and overthrow gov in the worst way possible that shook the whole crypto space.
If witnesses had gone through with eliminating the stake it would've caused a huge backlash and potentially ruined the community forever so I don't believe that was ever an option and I personally wouldn't have voted for such code. Similarly I respect your decision to not even vote for the code to freeze the tokens temporarily but again it seems like you're saying that's the sole reason you weren't able to make it back into top20 which looking at @smooth who also stepped down at the time shows that it potentially wasn't just about that. I kept my vote for you for a long time after the fork but I'm a bit hybrid when it comes to voting for witnesses so to me personally it just felt like you weren't around as much any longer as you were back then, not because of you not joining the majority in freezing the stinc stake.
That's kind of the issue I had with your initial comment so just wanted to make my memories of what occurred clear.
Hope you're doing well and to see you more active again at some point!
There is quite a bit to hash out in terms of what happened back then :) Freezing the stake was the first step, but I talked to enough people at the time (top witnesses and large stakeholders) to read between the lines and know that there was never really a plan to let them have their tokens and do as they wish with them (even if they made a "promise" to abstain from governance voting).
I think this quote from you nails it: "wanting it to be used as had been made clear by the founders for years but never followed up on". They purchased tokens legally in an OTK deal from Steemit, Inc. along with the purchase of the company. There was nothing in that purchase agreement that restricted the use of their tokens. Any "loose promises" that were made between the original founders and the community were never communicated to them, and I did not see it as the witnesses role to enforce that pseudo-agreement on a new stakeholder who did not take part in the original agreement and arguably had no knowledge about it at the time they purchased the tokens.
The security of the chain was really the only valid argument that I felt was being made at the time, and I personally did not buy into the train of thought that the token freeze was the only play for that. Whether that was the right or wrong decision on my part is up for debate, but I still feel that it was the right choice for me to make at the time given what I new back then.
You are right though, there were other factors at play. I had a new job and wasn't able to spend as much time keeping up with all the activities as I used to. After I was voted out and I opened up conversations with some of the larger stakeholders about the possibility of getting back in, I could tell it was going to be an uphill battle. Sides had been chosen and I hadn't gone as far as joining the other side (like some of the witnesses at the time did) but I definitely wasn't seeing as being on the "right" side either. Based on everything that was happening at the time I decided it would be best to accept my position as a backup witness and move on with my life.
I'm still quite actively "lurking" and fulfilling what I feel is my role as a backup witness. I keep my node up to date, price feed active and accurate, and monitor the "pulse" of the community for anything important.
With all that said and the ending part of it, I of course can't speak for all witnesses and don't mean to invalidate your thoughts and feelings over their decisions of voting. If you think some purposely didn't give you their vote later on based on your decision with what code to run at the time I also wouldn't necessarily agree with that decision.
Really well put, thank you for this comment and agree with most that was said.
That's also very interesting about removing the HBD APR decisions away from witnesses, I think most would agree with that. Maybe a stakebased system where stake can vote in favor of what % if any to have at any given time but with some checkpoints of how often it can change to not be annoying/unpredictable, I'm thinking similar to BTC mining difficulty but probably once every 4 weeks rather than 2.
De facto almost any type of voting (also for DHF) is already stake-based, isn´t it? Most of the witnesses who are whales are in the top 20. Coincidence only?
Well it's conflicted in this scenario, someone may want to vote for a witness but they're signaling either too high or too low APR. I.e. why should it be the job of witnesses to handle the economics of HBD when everyone could vote on it themselves specifically instead. It would also avoid certain scenarios I imagine have occurred where witnesses may signal higher or lower not based on what they think is best for hive but what they think is best for their position which doesn't sound like a great model to uphold.
Agree on this one.
Its important to have full custody of your witness server, if you run it on a hosted VPS you can run foul of the providers terms. If they suddenly decide that you are mining crypto and shut you down.
This is why I run my own server hosted at a reliable trusted location. No one can force me to shutdown.
Plus it's more decentralized, I am probably the only witness in Adelaide.
Honestly aslong as the chain is safe I am not much bothered. See the main thing for me is that what happened a couple of years ago must not happen again, a huge knock was dealt and so far we've come out better and stronger.. for the most part. The thing is when that happened I think a lot of users just didn't quite know what was going on... especially people who don't know a lot about the platform. How many potentially great story tellers were left behind on Steem not even knowing about Hive?
Safety isn't just the only concern really, I'd say people that actually add value to the chain... people who build up communities that are thriving, people who work on improving the chain and the things to do on it... like the games you and others are building. All of that will at the end of the day shed some more light on Hive as well... there for drawing in more and more people.
However sustainability is something we have to work on, (That might not be the right word for it?) (We must find a way to keep new people engaged even though they don't get as rewarded s they thought they would. Most people think it's a quick banger to get a buck but when they don't get that buck they back off)
Get what I am saying?
The first one that popped in my head before reading was essentially 'Trusted personas that keep the chain safe'. I voted for that, 'Produce blocks reliably' because its kind of literally their purpose 😅. 'Actively test upcoming code changes' because it kind of goes hand in hand with the previous one IMO. 'HBD APR, account costs, block size' I also chose just because this is the one that feels like 'representation' to me. As in I want to support the witness that is going to push for the features or changes in the ecosystem that I also want to see.
The other three are all fine and good too, especially 'Build things on chain without special funding'. However, I don't view those three as 'essential'. If it were a political election and these were the platforms of the candidates, these are the three I would consider 'bonus' if they were doing it but not necessary for the role.
I understand this to encompass also keeping and standing for the fundamental values of the chain, for example decentralization. The whole point of this blockchain experiment (at least for me) is that we want to create an improvement in the world, it's not just for crypto price go high, even if that last thing can help make things happen.
This one doesn't seem very important to me, or rather I see an altogether different design as more resilient. Instead of trying to achieve a fewer (by economic necessity) number of highly reliable nodes, we can have a larger number of nodes, even if any one of them is relatively less reliable, where each node can take over and cover for any downtime of another node. This would make the network as a whole highly more resilient and robust.
I also look for voluntary activity done in support of the chain, whether it's building community or building things or popularizing in some way or being engaged in discussions and offering ideas, or whatever else.
No, unless you have entirely different consensus algorithm in mind. But we have this one, and reliability of block production among consensus witnesses is exactly what it makes it resilient and robust. :-)
Oh, right, thanks for pointing it out.
So we actually have this, there are something like 400+ active witness nodes, the list pages on most of the interfaces just don't show that many. Because below a certain number, they have almost no vote support nor do they cycle into rotation unless hundreds above them fail over, but they ARE there, paying for servers with little to no remuneration for their support of the chain's block processing power, speed and infrastructure.
But the pay scale is so tilted toward the top 20, that it causes a lot of churn in these lower level witness nodes, they come and go and due to lack of expiring votes, remain as disabled, and having to be accounted for on the list pages and the chain scheduling algo itself, discarding those who are not active anymore. There is no way for a witness to completely resign on their own, only for their voters to completely remove all weight from them. My own dead st33m witness hasnt run in years, but has voters,who likewise are unreachable (ive checked) who left votes on them and then disappeared completely, without removing those votes. That dead witness continues to clutter up the witness lists (way down in the 400s but still) and has to be accomodated as inactive in the chain scheduling code. Extra cycles that could be avoided by allowing a witness to cancel all votes on itself and "quit" if they need to or want to for any reason at all.
But yeah, in summary, we have hundreds of nodes - resilient and failover by design, but nobody knows they exist.
1, 2, 3, maybe 5, and 7.
These would be my choices. There are other factors I’d consider too, but I’m still learning how witnesses work since I’ve had my head buried in the sand for the past month.
Greetings @acidyo ,
Numbers one, two, three and then be socially active, perhaps in a different way than you have mentioned here.
Bleujay would appreciate hearing their position on topics of interest to Hive....Hive retention, Hive quality of user, How Hive is doing in the marketplace, Kind of a brief to users where we are at, where we would like to be, etc. There are not a lot of people who could wear all hats...perhaps there could be an appointed spokesperson.
How can one vote for witnesses if what is important to them for Hive is not known...I actually learned more yesterday from solominer's post about some witnesses than is ever published. ^__^
Thank you for opportunity to speak on these things.
Kind Regards,
Bleujay
My votes are based on, Reliability both as a person and in producing blocks, If they run a project that I actively use and enjoy gives bonus points.
If they are up near the consensus range 20-35 rank, an understanding of code and the hive source code is preferred.
And then there's my friends witness nodes who I vote for because.. friends.
As much as I want to select all the points mentioned, I believe the most logical contribution a Witness can make to the platform is to build apps without special funding. Ideally, these apps should benefit the entire platform.
They should attract new users and improve user retention. Eventually, these apps could generate income for the Witnesses themselves, reducing their reliance on the income they receive from inflation (so they wouldn't need to sell as much of their producer rewards... though this is just an assumption as I don't have concrete data to support it).
So, yeah, that's what I think would benefit the majority of the ecosystem.
I don't really expect Witnesses to be overly social or to act as the platform's marketing people. They might be too technical to handle those roles 😅.
And you really think that it's more important than witness being able to keep the chain safe? Then who would do that instead?
And what would be the incentive for a witness to do that? :-)
People creating awesome apps are usually very different than those who can be reliable block producers.
These are excellent questions.
Ensuring blockchain security by producing blocks is the primary responsibility of a witness.
I was wondering why you directed these questions at my comment. I realized that my responses to the polls were from my perspective as a user who takes the importance of security for granted. Personally, blockchain security isn't as exciting to me as discovering a cool new app that I can use regularly.
Given the current price of $Hive, depending on where a witness lives, even a top witness position may not provide enough incentive to make a living. Expecting a witness to develop apps without funding is, therefore, too much to ask at this point.
I honestly don't know much about the witnesses. When I was starting, I voted the ones that continued to upvote my posts. Eventually I voted the ones that I use their products. Lately, I have just been using the rest of my votes on the ones that have high HBD APR.
Apparently I'm not matching any of the above criteria ;-)
(Although I have high HBD APR, just not as high as the many are wish to have, yet, similar with taxes, it's tempting to set the lowers, but that has to be an informed decision whether we can afford that or not)
But I encourage you to learn more about Hive governance (and thanks to @aciydo and his post - it's a good excuse now)
I do have a bit of understanding about the governance in general. How the top 20 process the blocks and makes sure Hive runs smoothly. When I say I don't know much about the witnesses, I meant that individually. Let's take you for example. Your description is very vague:
I have seen your name come up a lot though as someone who is good at programming and who people respect. You are also the one behind the Return Proposal, and top 3 in witnesses. But I still didn't know what you do. Looking at your posts, you seem to be the one handling the backend programming of Hive itself, and works on the forks and updates. But I had to look at the titles of your post individually. I don't really see myself checking each and every one of the witnesses out. So I just look at their descriptions.
Since I now know a bit about what you do, I voted on you, but I wish witnesses would improve their descriptions. Some don't even have anything written.
Yeah, I know, that's the hard part.
Witnesses back in the days were expected to run a seed node, aside from their own witness infrastructure. They were also expected to write semi-weekly #witness-update's in #witness-category and that didn't worked well because there were basically two kinds of people, those who were writing cool stories, and those who didn't had time for that because they were working their backend off for the platform.
Please note that this witness description isn't something that could be used for anything more than a catch phrase.
Witnesses uses various communication channels, my preference is an open source, community hosted rocket.chat instance that runs at OpenHive.Chat (see: #witness channel). While instance isn't that popular than it used to be, but we used to use #witness channel for interaction with witnesses, and some of us volunteered on #help.
PS
Being top 3 is relatively new to me and quite sad actually, but it is what it is ;-)
I see. I didn't even know openhive.chat existed haha. I do think that the whales and those with big stake do a good job of voting for witnesses. If they have more stake in Hive, then they will want to research more into things as well.
I can't say that I am very consistent in choosing witnesses... 14 votes spent only.
A witness must be active on Hive. Posting, developing projects, joining events.
I am looking at my votes, and, yeah, I could add a couple of votes for top10 guys... But why should I, they already are on the top... Better to find smaller witnesses to support their passion... I'll try to find someone right now.
Well, there's a reason to vote for top witnesses even though they are already on top.
General approval for top witnesses are dropping. Ideally top20 witness would have 50%+ of general HP approval.
But yeah, finding good motivated rookies is also good strategy :-)
I think the main witnesses should have at least a few of the qualities you have listed above. Plug in play coders can very easily let unwanted code in without knowing it. That's why it would be beneficial for some to have all the qualities listed above.
I mostly vote for witnesses because of what they are trying to do/build on Hive.
Like for example I'm a fan of crypto gaming, so most who are working on games have my vote.
Then I'm happy to have your vote even though I'm not a game-developer ;-)
My expectation would be people that I would know personally, e.g. having interactions over Hive or somewhere on Discord. At least I know I have a first hand experience or exchange with them and are familiar with who they are. I don't want to be voting "strangers". I guess "trusted personas" would be closer to this thinking.
LOLOL, I would be severely missing an opportunity then, to say, Hey there! I'm SirCork, myself and Enginewitty have a team witness named Pollenation. I'd like to introduce us and myself! Nice to meet you, stranger!
Hehe, this was more for the joke than the plug. I waffled before writing it a bit, but it was such a good setup :D
Hey stranger! Lol! I realised I have voted for both witnesses previously, thanks to the shoutout from @thgaming and @jim-crypto's messages! Cheers!
Awesome :) Thank you! So, How's things?
I am good, thanks! Just hanging out on Hive, writing, curating, commenting within the usual communities. How about yourself?
Oh about the same, writing, curating, commenting, in the discords, running the pollenation witness node, building the hivestreams.live (live streaming platform), building the hivestreams.net (user account tools), telling outsiders about Hive and how it works, creating new chain communities like "/c/costa rica pura vida", splitting my time between the USA selling everything I ever owned and spending time on land I bought in Costa Rica building my long term home there, and just doing the things.
Glad you're good! Glad we met! See you in the posts and in the streams!
Ah that's an interesting experience! Must be very different living in US vs Costa Rica! Happy to cross paths over here too! See you around!
Oh, that's not that easy for those who are focused on tech side of things and don't go for general chit-chats frequently. However seems like you attending HiveFest would be a good
pokemonwitness hunting ;-)Hey Grandalf the Grey! Ah I get what you mean! I think engagement can exist in various forms and I personally have supported some witnesses. Some of them, I know them earlier on and they went on to become a witness later, some of them have dropped me messages or commented/voted on my post to seeking my support and the connection began from there. I mean, I am quite passive in this aspect as I don't go on an active hunt and prefer to let nature takes its course.
Two I would select...
Remuneration on projects should be contributed through the chain to developers, time and effort always has a cost.
That's kinda a Sophie's choice :) The first two answers are basically one - If you keep the chain safe, then you must produce blocks reliably, especially when you're among the top witnesses. Anyway, it's the trusted people who keep Hive safe to me.
@tazi as a witness might have something to say here ;)
I agree with put the first two answers into one.
IMHO this is the main goal for every witness and doesn't matter if he is in top 20 or not...
The other tasks depends on concrete person, his skills, hobbies etc.
I'm surprised how few people voted for Hive's advertisement. I think witnesses should be able to do that too. They shouldn't have to, but it would be nice if they could. In my opinion it's more important than them being active on Hive.
I have on me Hive logos almost daily. Does that count? ;-)
That counts for sure man XD
I would like more communication. Most of the top 20 never publish and we don't know what they do. It's as if some don't care what the community thinks, they are comfortable in the top 20 with a few safe votes.
I take this opportunity to ask why something so important hasn't been fixed in months. Thanks
This site was developed by @roadscape who is absent for quite some time. But there's a power in decentralization that there are plenty of other alternatives for block explorers.
Nobody has an answer for that and I guess @roelandp is the one operating that site (If I'm not wrong). It has been down for maintenance for a very long time.
There are a few alternatives block explorers that can be used and the below is a decentralized version of a block explorer that is open source. The same is being hosted by multiple witnesses. You can give it a try.
https://hivescan.info/
https://hafscan.techcoderx.com/
https://explore.openhive.network/
Ausbitbank and Peakd also have their own block explorer. You can give that a try too.
I think roadscape is/was behind the site-
I have been using hiveblockexplorer. I will try the ones you suggest, thanks.
First of, all, accessibility and presence to the folks in the community was HIGH on my own list and a huge part of the platform of the witness team I am on for pollenation.
You got that point for sure right!
But counterpoint I also build tools and apps for the chain, and I do it for free, with no financial input from anyone (and my #80 witness isn't profitable or even paying for itself at all server-cost wise)
So I mean I get it, things would be nicer if they worked. That broken site is also one I used to use, but there are half a dozen other block explorers easily found by googling "Hive Block Explorer"
And when you build software for free, it's kind of not fair for the users to expect funded-software or paid-software-access level of uptimes.
Its more like, oh I whipped up this free thing for ya, oh its broke? Oh well, sorry dude.
But I see it in games I play too. Somebody spends 1000 hours making a cool FREE TO ACCESS custom game server, and suddenly when it goes down, people bitch about it. Look people, that was free, from our blood, sweat and tears. SO go QQ somewhere else on somebody else's totally free product you aren't paying for to play on or have built for you.
That said, when my community contributions go down, like HiveStreams.Live did for 9 hours during a DDoS attack two days ago, I stayed up all night for it, posted about being down, posted updates till back up again, etc. But that's because I care, not because anybody (and nobody has) gives me money to use it, build it or anything. They haven't - that 10000s of hours of my life was done for everyone for free.
So yeah, one guys free project is down, we absolutely cannot fault him for not fixing it at all, cause as for me? I never paid him a dime to provide it in the first place. It was nice to have, now its not there. On to the next free one!
So that's my counterpoint.
I checked 3 options on the survey, including building without financing.
For a witness to build apps without funding on the use of Hive, sure makes them get votes and if it stops working the logical thing to do is to remove the votes.
Other types of apps should have their own business model and be profitable, for example games. But it seems that in Web3 the most common and normalized thing is that projects are funded from a DAO or from the community itself without being profitable or sustainable.
And that's the biggest mistake they make. Only sustainable projects makes sense. DAO (in my very humble opinion) should be only used in core development which obviously is profitable to whole ecosystem and wouldn't be funded otherwise.
Like in the real world, taxes should be spent on general infrastructure; it's reliability and security and basic tools for communities to function (education, health care), but the rest? Casino and soccer stadium? No.
Taxes are theft and I would not want to compare them to Hive. You got me thinking though. Although in Hive we are not coerced and participation is voluntary, it is also true that proposals are passed without our vote and it is supposed to be everyone's money. Could it be likened to taxes? Is part of my participation being taken away from me without my permission? I am just thinking about this now and I think it could be a deep topic to reflect on the type of governance and how free it is. However the best thing is that we don't have a centralized state deciding.
Yeah, analogy wasn't perfect, sorry for that. But yes, the big difference is that we voluntarlly joined Hive. Those are not even our money per se, but it's like air and water. It's not ours per se, it's a common good, but we should better be sure to care about those resources.
We 100% agree. I was very vocal about big games with tenure, not being self profitable and relying on DHF funds for life support.
While building a very sophisticated offering for free, for everyone to use, for free as well, and somehow, I'll find a way to make it pay for itself, but it would not be by proposal. It's a business, not a socialist factory the people should have to pay for, nor do I want to be beholden to the community, if it say... goes down for 9 hours on a wednesday at 2am. Etc.
What you wrote in your comment above this, is exactly how I also preach it. But the if it stops working part I would leave out, because there is probably more to that story. If the tool stops working, eh, I paid nothing for it (unless I did, then we have a different story) but if it stops working but other things start working or other things are still being done, eh... I dunno man, I dunno, lots more to it than - the free thing they made for you isnt around anymore, which can happen for 1000 reasons, from chain code changes, to their software platforms changing (php 7 to php 8 broke 1000s of php sites a few years ago etc)
I cant say a tool breaking is a deal beaker emphatically. But otherwise, about funding things on your own? HEAR HEAR! I wrote a whole manifesto about it just this week. :)
The vote is the payment. That's why I grow my HP, it's an investment. The votes a witness receives for their “free” applications are forms of payment. Of course if it stops working a few hours nothing happens, but if it's months or definitive, the votes that supported it should be withdrawn, because that's what they were given for.
Should we continue to support a witness for what it did in the past, if in the present it is not doing anything? The best thing about Hive is that there is no election every 4 years and we can vote at any time.
That's all reasonable with this additional set of guidelines for it clarified.
It can't be only one criterion. And it depends on what's going on. At various times, voting up a different set of witnesses can be beneficial to entire ecosystem. Since I am a bigger dolphin, my votes can be... more decentralized, without risking the security of the chain.
Recently changed my votes to support everyone who was pointing to 15% inflation or less, this has an obvious impact on the long term price of hive.
It's good to switch it up once and awhile, let's be honest, Hive hasn't been doing that great and some of the witnesses can share some of the blame as they really aren't doing anything.
Yeah, but the question is what they are expected to be doing?
However, they often wear their stakeholder hats as well (which, in my opinion, they should, to show they're actively involved). Ultimately, everything that happens on Hive is up to the stakeholders, whether they are witnesses or not. Still, it's true that witnesses should set an example, not make excuses.
Don't expect much of anything from witnesses other than they keep their servers going.
As you said, they should set an example.
If a witness downvotes me, if they say something annoying/extremist, act too political or support some proposal I disagree with I may remove my vote. For the record, I've always supported and still support your witness.
Easy peasy answer for measy:
Contributions: to the chain via app building, community building, node stability (not missing blocks,etc)
Accessibility: Are they ivory tower witnesses who never post or come to the discords or show themselves in public on comments, or on streaming interviews or anywhere, ever? Those are a hard pass, no matter how "busy" they may be building and running things, if you aren't in the community, just go mine bitcoin blocks in complete anonymity FFS.
Personality: Yup, I take hits myself on this one, there's folks just not able to understand my kind of passionate tough love for the chain and it's people. But some are just toxic, slimy assholes, and others are the most genuine and lovable humans on Earth. These matter to ME.
How they benefit me: Just being honest, if a witness makes tools I personally use, thats a higher level to me than one who makes tools I do not personally use. Again, this is relative, as one who makes tools or communities or whatever that I don't use, also gets a higher opinion from me than one who does nothing at all, except pay $50 bucks a month for a server to make blocks and draw producer rewards with no other chain input at all from them.
Financial settings on their witness config: Important but most of them all set about the same things anyway here.
Will my vote even matter to them?: On the list for honesty's sake. If I have one vote to give and it could go to a top 20 witness where my tiny megavests and proxy voter chain under my control would be a tear drop in their ocean of votes, I am going to be more likely to give my vote to a #70 witness who works hard and where my tiny MV might move them to #69 instead of kind of wasting it on the guy who won't even know my vote is there at all.
That's about it, not much madness to my methods, in my opinion, and they are real and honest and in a couple of my criteria, say things out loud that not everyone is willing to admit are true for them too. Like personality. It's real, don't even lie.
Thanks for listening!
If you would to like to support a mid-level witness that builds apps, games, communities and is present and accessible all over discord and the posts and comments every single day, well I know a partnership team witness you might want to consider! ;) But I won't plug it here, we're easy to find, which is kind of the point! :)
@acidyo be kinda cool if you unmuted me, but its your perogative, I always thought you were cool, but I guess your association with people I think are very uncool may have lead to this at some point in the past, but its odd to vote my comment, but leave it hidden :)
I have had quite bad experiences with things you've said in the past, while I acknowledge your comment and resurgence of activity it doesn't mean I trust you or your intentions at this point in time. What I can say is that you were right about ned at least so that's why I'm not completely ignoring you.
LOL, fair, I appreciate the explanation. We can delete this exchange if you would like :)
The number 1 goal of a witness should be to keep the chain going.
Ah this is a good but tough one, I needed to make multiple selections haha. 1, 2, 3 and 7!
My expectations were a lot higher until I booted up my own node and was like god damn this is kind of hard lol
Of all the factors listed, the most pleasant has to be the human side and the interaction of the witness not only within the Hivevsino chain but on other social networks to learn much more about the work he does for us.
Are you aware that you're not voting for anyone?
I would like the witnesses to return 20% for HBD. But I don’t vote for witnesses, because I changed HIVE to HBD :)
Now that is fairly greedy.
I plan to buy several hundred thousand HIVE at a lower price. And now I'm accumulating HBD. Perhaps for 35 thousand HBD I will buy 700 thousand HIVE, and with this purchase I will support the price of HIVE in the market. Not many people buy around 1 million HIVE.
Okay that's awesome, that is actually really awesome. But if you'll be buying up Hive why bother about HBD's return?
Honestly I don't think 20 % is sustainable. It was nice but sheesh.
The more % HBD I get now, the more I will buy HIVE later. I think this is good for Hive. When in a bear market, several dozen accounts will buy millions of HIVE for HBD.
Why not just buy HIVE now at $0.20 instead of bluffing?
🤣 ssssshhhh 0.2 is fucking low ey
Hell yeah. Time to buy.
Why did you think I was bluffing? I have prepared my money and am waiting for SP500 and Bitcoin to fall (to 30k). By then you will see what the price of HIVE will be.
Why do I think you're bluffing?
For starters, you've been here for at least a year and haven't bothered to accumulate even 100 HIVE.
I have 35 thousand HBD in another account. Do you want to see or take my word for it :)
Amount of people is irrelevant.
Amount of HIVE is irrelevant too, it's amount of HIVE times its price what matters.
And $35k worth of volume isn't anything spectacular or unusual.
It's just wild bet on future market and not that awesome as @technicalside thought at the beginning given that to buy 700k HIVE for $35k you need it to be for $0.05.
But you might not be able to do that for HBD. Currently Hive Debt Support Price is $0.059 so it's one cent away from ruining your idea.
You know how HBD works, right?
Laughs never really thought that was awesome. Just the idea of buying millions of Hive is awesome. I don't really care at what price he does it. As long as he does what he says but I doubt he will xD
It's actually similar to hoping to get free drinks on the airplane when something bad happens and the cabin decompresses because then most of the people are busy wearing oxygen masks instead of buying soda. ;-)
Laughs xD Ah god that is so spot on dude! It's like trying to fish but you only have a weight on and no hook!
Hive is at a very low, if he doesn't buy now chances might be he never gets this chance again xD Why waste it?
5 Hive for a dollar is frakkin whack!
Stay good broh!
Yes. Perhaps the peg price will be $0.05 by then.
At first when I was new to the platform I started for the witnesses who share the rewards with the users voted for them but over the time I understand the importance and started to upvote the person I know and the people are more active and support the contents on blockchain.
i tried voting (for all 7) but (using @ecency signed in with Hivesigner - which has my active key) i got a message saying active key required, but without Hivesigner popping up for me to approve. i suspect this is something to do with the app you used to create the poll.
I used @peakd, hive polls are new so I guess not fully working with all different logins yet, etc.
This poll feature is just a small app that looks for specific custom_json operations, and shouldn't require active key.
The operation (given you vote for option 1) should look something like this:
{ "type": "custom_json_operation", "value": { "id": "polls", "json": "{\"poll\":\"acidyo/what-are-your-expectations-of-hive-witnesses\",\"action\":\"vote\",\"choices\":[1]}", "required_auths": [], "required_posting_auths": [ "gtg" ] } }I don't know how it would handle multiple choices, i.e.
[1,2,3,4,5,6,7].I think the best thing to have for a witness is to be trusted. Since it is the key to having a good relationship.😊