Get back to basics. Censorship resistant content creation.
Absolutely ditch the DHF. Pay some qualified marketing experts as consultants and stop handing out cash to leeches to ride the conference gravy train. Ceremonially burn the rally car and drop the 5000HBD a month Karaoke competition.
Start focusing on users who bring value instead of the 100% takers and focus funding and projects in regions that have the ability to influence and invest instead of basket case countries where Hive is doing nothing except enabling scammers and pumping dollars into failed economies.
Complete rebrand.
Remove proxy voting.
Reduce curation back to 25%. For larger stakeholders, it's barely worth creating anything when you've got an autovoter that's voting popular creators and bringing in whopping daily passive income.
Whilst we're on the subject, ban auto voters.
Bring back vote selling. It builds turnover and doesn't make the buyers that much profit but linked to lower curation rewards, should encourage people to stake more Hive.
Triggered?
Absolutely!
What's wrong with proxy voting?
Edit: also, how to ban autovotes/bots/socks? Ned proposed oracles, but never detailed the specific mechanism that enabled oracles to differentiate between bot/socks and a human being.
Thanks for taking the time :-)
My objection to proxy voting is two-fold.
If people are too lazy, uninterested to make up their own mind and vote on an issue, they should forfeit their vote.
I suspect that many, many proxies are people who haven't been anywhere near the chain in years and are legacy users from days of yore. Also possibly accounts full of Hive from the original ninja mine. Votes should only be cast using sp that's been bought or earned.
The system as it stands is absolute BS. If BT wants a project to be funded he votes it. If he doesn't want it funded, he doesn't vote it. If it looks like a project may get funded anyway, he can choose to vote the return proposal. One account controls all.
As for autovoters. No idea how to stop them but I do think they're a hugely negative thing.
When I learned I could proxy my witness vote I found someone I thought knew what to do and proxied to them. Eventually I had to vote myself as their circumstances changed and they weren't voting. By then I had learned a lot, and voted as I thought best. I think that's how proxy voting should be used, and folks that haven't paid much attention in years can also use proxy voting well.
I can see that folks that don't feel they well understand whom to vote for should withhold their vote - but I don't think they will. I appreciate your view that people should simply have to vote themselves, but they can still pick someone they think is a good example and mirror their votes.
I agree about BT, but don't see how that comes into the discussion. Do a lot of folks proxy to BT?
There are some mechanisms where several established individuals can vouch for an account, but I neither think these are foolproof, because they could vouch for their own socks or bots. I think bots are existentially dangerous, and are about to destroy sovereignty globally, because agentic AI is going to replace government. That's what digital ID being adopted now across the world will enable, and why it's being pushed everywhere.
I’d agree with most of this but I don’t know enough about vote selling to comment .