But the tone has begun to shift. It shouldn't have taken them so long to realize that minnows and plankton are the heart and soul of steemit, and can't be ignored if it's to be successful, but at last it seems like they have.
Is there something specific you're thinking of here? I feel like I must have missed something.
Yes? I don't know where I was seeing things specifically since there were resteems and such, and it's been a few days, so my feed is deep. But I saw lots of self-congratulatory posts and, in response to frustrations, claims that we should be patient because the system would resolve itself and maybe we should buy more steem if we weren't able to do enough yet. I think it took them a while to realize that this was a problem that was affecting even enfranchised users who had invested time, labor, and money to the blockchain, not just Suzy-come-latelys. Perhaps we should all learn a little patience, but I think the correct initial post upon hardfork should have been more conscious of the immediate impact, more cautious, and more conciliatory and reassuring. That's my PR perspective.
Separately, when I expressed my frustrations on discord, I felt like a witness shut me down, dismissed my concerns, and told me to stop complaining. Which is, like, sure, we're all just people having human reactions and trying to protect our egos, myself included. That being said, I do expect a lot of professionalism from both witnesses and STINC, which includes more explicit acknowledgement that something went wrong and will be fixed. I just really didn't see any explicit reassurance in the hours and days after the event that, if things didn't resolve themselves without intervention, they would intervene: they would do what was necessary to make it so new users could have a good experience on the Steem blockchain.
That's all. It was a little bit about what "they" said, but it was more about what "they" didn't say. ("They" means here, whoever it is that speaks with authority on the subject of HF20, from witnesses to STINC to even just the largest stakeholders.)
Sorry for not being more clear - it wasn't the initial bad attitude I was questioning, it was the idea that it had improved. I agree 100% with what you're saying here. What I'm missing is any attitude change that might have gone along with the new patch.
Oh! Yes. I saw a witness say, explicitly, if problems persist, they will do what is necessary to keep fixing it. Which is not an about-face, but is as least acknowledgement that things needn't be left to resolve themselves.
Posted using Partiko Android