dictatorship, hindenburg, titanic and a hitler meme are all a bit too over the top for me. I'm glad you're voicing your concerns, but a "Dan must be stopped" call to action against the very person who created what we are all enjoying isn't (IMO) the best approach for having a respectful dialogue about the issue. It seems many are already discussing the issue on github and voicing their disapproval there. We'll see where it goes from here, and it's definitely something to keep an eye on. For that, I thank you, but I won't give you my vote on this post because I think the tone is counter productive to a rational, open conversation about the issue. I may be wrong and maybe a more alarmist tone is called for. As with many things, we shall see over time.
Yep. I posted this same screen shot as a comment here 4 hours ago and was the first to give that Github comment a thumbs up. As much as people want to complain about this system and the inequality of it, to me, I see a platform that is functioning surprisingly well for such an early beta.
I feel like I have much more say here than I ever have or will ever have on any other social media platform on the Internet. I'm not kissing Dan's ass or bowing at the throne of his team, but I'm also recognizing without his (and his team's) efforts, none of what I'm currently enjoying would exist. As an entrepreneur myself, I respect what they've created here and that they have, to some degree, given control of it away to others who are willing to invest and/or influence the network. Yes, today, they have more control than anyone else and they may keep that control well into the future. On any other network or on any other service I use, the level of influence of the founders does not prevent me from using and benefiting from the service. Until they use that control for harm, I don't think an alarmist tone is helpful. The closed Github issue, in this case, I think proves my point. The respectful, rational dialogue on that issue ticket is what matters.
Well said, Luke. 100% agree.
Sometimes I feel like a lot of these complaints come from a place of deep seated envy.
Thanks Sterlin. I think we all have levels of that same envy. Rereading my comment here, I see my own envy and insecurity. I felt the need to let everyone know I posted that image first. Why? We are all just human.
They absolutely are, and you can find them if you dig into the comment feeds of these people. I was absolutely over the moon about one little upvote that was almost paid out to me when I stumbled into one of these characters and my future, only the next month, mind you, flew out the window. Now I am back to square one and the individual who flagged me and destroyed the little hope I had that I would have at least a small reprieve from the uncertainty of my future, had to go deliberately into my feed and rub some more salt in the wound, while claiming that he didn't care. Yeah, didn't care so much he wastes his time on pathetic little me. I'm convinced.
Totally agree @lukestokes, Dan already closed the issue, and it was discussed with witnesses and it was not accepted for many reasons. Witnesses are not pawns like some here are saying, and hardly all the witnesses agree with Dan on everything, the Hitler meme is tasteless. I have seen many witnesses I respect challenge Dan more than once, even Ned does not agree with Dan all the time. So making this sound like a dictatorship is far from the truth.
To be fair, it was Charlie Chaplin. It was somewhat tongue in cheek. I tried to make it apparent that some of my post was intentionally over the top, even though I was bringing up a legitimate point. It seems that I missed the mark with that, but I took a risk...
I want to add a little more substance to my previous response to this comment. As my previous response stated, "I always value your input."
I don't want to risk that being some innocuous disposable comment. It's a very genuine expression of the esteem that I have for you. You are consistently the voice of reason when things get out of hand and things get personal and vitriolic. While we often disagree--even passionately--you are always respectful and humble. The example that you set is irreplaceable, and I'm thankful that you are part of this community.
Wow, thank you @bacchist. I greatly appreciate that. Many here probably don't realize you and I have had many wonderful conversations both here on Steemit and in direct message chat over the past month, almost every day, and I value the friendship we've been building. Yes, we disagree passionately about many things regarding the nature of property, money, and what a future anarchist society should look like. I respect your views and what I learn from debating with you. You've given me one of my favorite compliments so far.
Thank you.
As opposed to a WWII japanese propaganda poster set against an imperial battle flag?
As always, I value your input.
Not enough to form a proper reply?
I thought that was a proper reply. He made a couple valid points and explained why he chose not to upvote. I totally respect that... Not sure what else needs to be said.
oh you drama queen...
It makes for good reading sometimes, not going to lie lol.
13 hardforks give me this impression:
We all understand that the project is experimental and changes are expected. But one shouldn't treat a blockchain with $180M market cap as his personal playground.
Comment with your main account instead of trying to impersonate the steemit founders with sock puppet accounts @kushed or whoever you are.
Disagree.
I disagree with @smooth and agree with @rainman
For all your apparent reasonableness you do disappoint me sometimes smooth.
This had nothing to do with anonymity and everything to do with trying to muddy the waters and confuse readers.
The only valid point raised is that Dan controls a lot of Steem Power, beyond that it's pure speculation and FUD. The memes are not appropriate, and positing that Dan will "maneuver sycophants into place" is just ridiculous. Dan has shown time and time again that he's willing to not only listen to criticism but also make compromises, unlike kushed and the clique he's part of.
@lukestokes I understand where you are coming from but like I said, it was obviously done as a protest and not an attempt to deceive. Obvious to me at least, and I think everyone.
The idea of some sort of centralized (using signing by an authority which could be optionally attached to an account) or decentralized (using some sort of web of trust) "verified" accounts is an idea worth exploring, but is a subject for a different conversation, as you say.
@smooth: If that account was created as a protest just within this thread, then that's pretty impressive. Based on the conversations I've had with numerous non-native english speakers here, I could see this account being used to cause a lot of harm for people who don't understand who is who.
That said, I should withhold my judgement until actual harm is done from this specific account. It does, however, make me uncomfortable as I've already seen multiple examples of identity theft on Steemit, complete with faked verifications.
The account was created through mining 4 months ago, the same person also registered the larimer account, so we're dealing with a name squatter, something I personally despise. It falls in the same category as patent trolls, leachers trying to make money off the hard work of others.
Couldn't that have been done via a username like "anonymous923842748"? To me, upvoting accounts like this sets a concerning precedent for future impersonations, but I also agree with you that hiding the comment with a flag may not be good either. That said, I almost wanted to flag it as well just so others would see a lower reputation and not get confused about the real identity.
Maybe this is already a problem with accounts like @berniesanders, assuming this platform does take off to threaten the other major social media networks (think verified Twitter accounts). I'm curious how these issues will be resolved in a decentralized manner, but maybe that's a subject for a different conversation.
@lukestokes I did not claim it was created as a protest, but it was clearly being used as a protest. If the post were more like "This is Dan, we have an urgent issue with the coin and I need everyone to post your private keys as a reply right away", that would be impersonation. I agree with you about waiting for some actual malicious act, before asserting malice. The mere duplication of an account name by itself is not malicious, nor is it identity theft, it is just an account name. I just searched Facebook and Linkedin and there is a very large number of people with that exact same name. Before long there will be many people on Steemit with the same exact names, including some with the same names as well-known Steemit personalities, if not already.
@rainman, I'm not sure why you are bringing up the memes. I did not upvote the original post and I thought it was highly sensationalized and not the best way to address the issues. The politics surrounding the witness list and in particular whether the sort of top-down control that has been exercised and how well the composition of the list serves the wider community are a relevant topics for conversation and need not be hidden because you disapprove of someone presenting them under an obvious pseudonym or doing so less than politely. As you may recall I have myself expressed some concerns about Dan's actions in this regard in the past, and recent actions taken have reinforced the relevance of the issue. As far as the anonymous accounts, you seem convinced that @kushed is behind it, or if not you are simply feel like mentioning his name twice anyway without actually knowing. Perhaps this has some connection to the fact that @kushed happens to be one one of the long-serving and relatively-independent witnesses with a good record and documented accomplishments who has recently been pushed out, but I'm completely speculating there because I have no idea what such a connection might be. For the record I have no idea who owns those accounts.
@chhayll if posts were made that referred to me in the third person and criticized me and my actions, and if that were done using a name similar to mine, I would interpret that as a stylized form of anonymity and protest and not an attempt to mislead anyone that I was actually the one posting (and criticizing myself). I respect your different point of view on the matter though.
@smooth: Replying here due to nesting.
I mentioned the memes because the comment we're discussing says the "memes are entirely appropriate". I disagree.
I suspect it's kushed because:
My saying this has nothing to do with his record as a witness. I did try to look at it following your comment though and it's not as well-documented as you imply.
I noticed they also have a @larimer account. Sock puppets make me sad. Can't we all be adults and speak openly and rationally about our opinions?
I up-voted that comment because it was funny, due to the name and had some valid points.
But no, it not me. I am never been shy about voicing my concerns in slack, don't need to hide behind anon just to make a comment like that.
Why did you just downvote my blog post? I credited any source that was used including image... what was the problem? Just trying to understand the problem so it can be fixed.
(I'd contact you another way but not sure how)
Thanks
It's not really about the voting power. Almost everyone accesses Steem through a single gateway — the steemit.com website, and the owners of the site can change anything they want, even replace the Steem blockchain with a centralized database. Many users do not care about blockchains and decentralization, they are only here for the "write a post and win money" lottery.
Dan, you nailed it.
I'll send you 399 Steem for nedscott
That is the most touching, play by the rules of the game gestures that I have ever seen. It's all yours. Keep your money.
One of many honorable and transparent moves I have seen from @ned
May this continue to be the case!
This one is just silly.