You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Bursting the audience bubble, communication from stakeholders, and why you're probably wrong about the "Whale Experiment"

in #steemit • 8 years ago

The platform in all aspects is still in development, from technology point of view they call it beta, from community point of view this is maybe even alpha. Therefore, I do like to see many different experiments since that is what you do in alpha and beta testing. It would have been super cool that all of this (the experiment) was better communicated and managed with involvement from Steemit INC.

Keep on Steeming.

8 years ago in #steemit by
$0.00
    1 vote
    Reply 4
    Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     8 years ago  

    I think it's clearly beta, it's right there in the top right, but that's Steemit.com, I'm not sure how Steem the blockchain is categorized, but considering the upcoming hard fork 17 is set as version 0.17.0, that's in beta too.

    I'm not sure I agree that large stakeholders need to work with Steemit Inc. on their own experiments, no more than you or I should do it. Again, probably the main point of the article, is that there seems to be support for greater responsibility from larger stakeholders. How this should be implemented though (and whether it should, consequences and side effects, etc.) is currently beyond me!

    [-]
     8 years ago  

    Of course, the community needs always to be involved. Steemit INC involvement is required because they create the code. We all need to work out how we want to run things, but that should be done in a controlled way ie through programs that are well communicated and open for discussions.

    $0.00
      Reply
      [-]
       8 years ago (edited) 

      It's a good aspiration, but requiring it of users is pointless unless we have it worked into the system. It's pointless in a very real way - it's unenforceable, and so we have people pointlessly rallying against users for a perceived injustice where there is none.

      @krnel was one of many criticizing the rule of immutable code as law, or the idea that once it's in the code we have to be happy with it. The reality is that's what we have at any given moment. Here's an excerpt:

      The code can change according to the betterment of the community. Ignoring the issues in the community while simply following the tech/code because the tech/code says "you can do this" is not going to create a lasting platform as it ignores the community of real people that make up the platform and focuses on what the tech/code says is "allowed". What is allowed is to be determined by people/community that can change the tech/code rules to better serve the community rather than harm it. The tech/code isn't immutable from change or from being flawed or working incorrectly.

      The last part is very relevant. And my position would be recognize the failing (whatever it may be), change the code and at all time be realistic about what can be expected of free actors in a given system. Debate for change instead of saying "why don't you act in such and such way?". Btw, not accusing you of this, just making a general point.

      [-]
       8 years ago  

      I agree with what you are saying. Code is the result of what the community wants. Coding takes time and being able to run such experiment by code takes way more time to implement and way more effort to implement, than how it is run now. And I believe the whales did start this experiment based on the numerous posts and comments made regarding the in-balance in the power.

      $0.00
        Reply