ATTENTION IMPORTANT CHANGES TO THE ELECTION:
1. NO REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED TO VOTE -
All Steem Users, whether they registered previously or not, can vote in this election. (scroll down to cast your vote - be sure to read each proposal).
Due to feedback from the community as well as concern that even though the need to register to vote was announced well in advance, it could have not been as clearly understood as it needed to be. This would possibly result in lower participation in this election and even though we had original reasons behind implementing the registration process, we felt (based on community feedback) that those benefits did not outweigh the cons of less of the community being involved in this decision. REGISTRATION IS NO LONGER REQUIRED.
2. ELECTION DATES EXTENDED - APRIL 10TH - APRIL 24TH (9:10 PM UTC)
Making a change in the middle of a process is never ideal, but we felt this was the best decision to ensure the community's voice is heard. Because of the change though, we will be extending the Election Vote end date by one week (April 24th). Hopefully this will ensure everyone has enough time to understand the changes in the process as well as ample time to review the proposal options below and make an informed decision.
Thank you.
Steem Alliance Structure Proposal Election
The deadline for voting is 14 days from the post, or around 21:10 (9:10pm) UTC on April 24th.
To see results with correct filters, click here
The final structure proposals can be found here, and will now be put up for vote.
There was also a contest to write up comparisons for the final structure proposals which you can find here with many excellent analyses.
Summary of Choices
(Presented in alphabetical order)
"Decentralized Steem Incubator" Submitted By @alexvan
Main focus shall be the development of new self sustainable projects, being it business, NGOs or personal individual projects on the Steem blockchain.
"DeCentraSteem" Submitted By @impactn
DeCentraSteem, a decentralised structure made of a network of ever-changing self-organised working circles. One purpose, strengthening communities, and nine rules make it work without a central board.
"Foundation Structure Proposal" Submitted By @upheaver
The goal of this proposal is to create and grow a sustainable ecosystem around Steem blockchain and to make Steem the leading blockchain for decentralized apps and communities worldwide.
The proposal features a robust fiat based management structure, fundraising through corporate and individual membership fees, various types of funding activities and on-chain advisory role for Steem community.
https://github.com/pauliusuza/steem-alliance
"The Merger" Submitted By @shadowspub
The goal of this proposal is to combine some of the best ideas put forward and work alongside Steemit Inc to build the most beneficial Community Foundation possible, through collaboration. The Foundation will be where community members, investors, developers, and influencers come together to advance the Steem ecosystem and underlying technology.
https://steemit.com/foundationproposal/@shadowspub/foundation-proposal-the-merger
"People Survive By Supporting Each Other" Submitted by @TheHive
Investment of Steem in FIAT industry is what will bring an assurancce of the demand for Steem. Creating industry and a chain owned (not privately owned) company in the FAT world providing local services provides an opportunity to have Steem used in a concentrated environment. As opposed to being used across continents. Growing hubs or localities that later can join and support each other. The growth of the Chain and the benefits of using it get amplified with compound growth over time, Reducing the reliance on and the influence of entities outside of the Chain. Let's Build it together.
https://steemit.com/thealliance/@thehive/i-made-a-proposal
Election Details
- The Election will run for 7 days (final day being April 17th)
- Voting Method will be stake weight with a cap at 250k More Details Here.
- You must vote using the dpoll interface.
- You can select multiple options to indicate approval for multiple choices.
- You can see the current tally by selecting 'SA Stake Based Voting' as the result layout and 'steemalliance' as the community in the list of filters.
- Once submitted, you cannot change your vote!
How To Ensure Fairness
The goal of this group from the beginning has been to be transparent, fair and accountable to the community. ALL transcripts from the inception can be found on chain and/or within The Steem Alliance Discord Server. There are no closed rooms, it all can be seen right there.
Due to feedback we have received we want to ensure this election has another level of transparency and accountability.
The election will have open audit logs (just like the working group election did) and will be released (just like before).
We ask that each Proposal Team form a group to review the election audits, as well as anyone from the community as well. This way there will be multiple eyes on the results, reviewing and ensuring fairness is achieved.
This election will be decided by the community vote, not the working group.
- The community will decide.
- In case of tie, there will be a run off election.
The working group (or anyone involved in the proposals) will vote just like everyone else. Their vote will be weighed based on the method detailed above. This is a community election.
Open audits will be available, we hope many groups step up to review them.
YOU MUST VOTE AT dPoll
Which structure proposal(s) do you support for the Steem Alliance?
You may select more than 1, and once submitted, you cannot change your vote!
- “Decentralized Steem Incubator” Submitted By @alexvan
- “DeCentraSteem” Submitted By @impactn
- “Foundation Structure Proposal” Submitted By @upheaver
- “The Merger” Submitted By @shadowspub
- “People Survive By Supporting Each Other” Submitted by @thehive
Answer the question at dpoll.xyz.
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Link to remove posting permission for dpoll.
https://v2.steemconnect.com/revoke/@dpoll.xyz
This link is generic if you change dpoll.xyz to the app you want removed.
dPoll can now vote using Steem Keychain
See this post for details, but you can basically use the "vote with keychain button".
Some tips from @happyme:
How to use dPoll without needing to trust Steemconnect with active key
dpoll.xyzusing any means (cli wallet, etc). Steem keychain has the ability, and I've set up an example site here with the ability to do so:How to use dPoll temporarily with active key
Is sc not open source?
Isn't trusting keychain the same as trusting steemconnect?
I've got more.
Yes it is, but different people are at different places when it comes to what they trust.
Does steemconnect have my active key?
No. In theory (auditable) it's all browser side where you sign the transactions. Steemconnect servers won't see it.
That is what I was told when I got here, but I don't code.
So, this flap is over nothing?
If you want to revoke your permissions, after voting, please follow the link above.
Also
Proposal(s) Plural, means you can vote more than one. This was a request brought forward by the community a few ago that we included. We are updating the post to make it more clear as well.
Think @dpoll.xyz (and a lot of other DApps that only use SteemConnect for user authentication, basically) could use a TTP-free proof of identity implementation. There are I think multiple options that are very much viable. A few:
I feel @steemaliance should really take it upon herself to avoid becoming a self amplifying loop of security-illiteracy, and excluding stake holders, especially larger stake holders, who won't trust their active key to SteemConnect in order to be able to vote, I feel, initiates just that.
I know #4 is far from perfect, but it shouldn't be too much trouble for @emrebeyler to integrate it into the existing @dpoll.xyz system in order to cater to security conscience stake holders who prefer not to hand their active key over to steemconnect in order to vote on these important matters.
Any thought on this @emrebeyler? Especially because these votes are stake based, I feel this is the perfect use case for a steemconnect-free way to authenticate to the voting engine.
I will NOT BE VOTING on dpoll because I have NO IDEA HOW SECURE it it is. Why do we need to compromise security in order to vote? Make dpoll work with keychain or find a new voting method.
I will discuss a way to gather non dpoll votes with the working group. I imagine we can also find a way to allow other inputs.
That would be great. Thanks!
Hey, I just realized, you already trust your posting authority to many other dapps. You aren't compromising anything that you haven't implicitly given up already (trust-wise).
Note also that dpoll doesn't even ask you to grant posting authority.(this is wrong, stricken out. steemconnect asks for it, and you still have to trust steemconnect. dpoll's app itself doesn't have access)Steemconnect is the trusted mediator here, and as long as you trust steemconnect, there's 0 reason to distrust dpoll. Just want to throw that out there.
And you can immediately revoke what little authorization you granted as noted in the parent comment.
How difficult would it be to spoof steemconnect? I see a pop-up that looks like steemconnect and I insert my key. Next thing I know, it does nothing and it's too late to revoke it. I HATE using my actual steem keys all the time.
Yeah, I understand the point. But actually even this is fairly difficult because the popup will show the URL with the cert, and you can be sure that if you trust steemconnect, it is fine.
But anyway, we are discussing it.
IF everyone is careful and not in a rush.
It is too easy to get careless and lose everything. I prefer to be paranoid about such things.
Once your keys are entered to Steem Connect, you do not need to re-enter them.
Connecting somewhere else, the site should be verified by Steem Connect.
Any site asking for your keys to be re-entered should never need your aster Key. The majority should not need your active key.
@happyme, it looks like keychain will be implemented in a few days. Just wait until then and you can cast your vote.
This is GREAT news. Thanks a lot!
Thank @emrebeyler, the creator of dpoll. He’s amazing about implementing new features and helping to make dpoll what the community sees as beneficial. He deserves a big thanks on all he’s done in this process alone. Glad it could get worked out 🙂
Yes, thanks to @emrebeyler. I had no idea who was behind dpoll. It seems all the programmers know each other. Does anyone know who is behind DrugWars?
Implementing a steemconnect free way of authentication on dPoll is expensive at this time. Hopefully, we will have the optional keychain integration in the future.
Let me know if it would be usefull (and if I can help) making the micro transaction option work with dpoll.
@asgarth, @jarvie, can this happen on steempeak?
I agree that 'the community' is a herd of cats, at this point, and trying to herd them while claiming legitimacy may be premature.
Well first of all I believe strongly that polling should be a non-platform specific act on the blockchain. And there are ways to do that so every front end could do it. I think that's the first step.
I thought it was a keychain that I could use outside chrome/brave.
Voted for
Voted for
Ich auch.
Does anyone actually think that this bullshit is any different from all the other bullshit steemit inc has told you? GO SMTS BABY!
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
So you can vote for several options but not for none?
Posted using Partiko Android
They locked us out.
Vote on the write in.
Or vote the best option you see.
Or don't vote.
It is up to you.
Of course they locked us out.
They always lock out people with common sense.
Posted using Partiko Android
Well, they can only silence us if we let them.
Then they rearrange the situation as if we were destructive whiny kids with no ideas how to make it better.
Posted using Partiko Android
Lol, 'the community' can do no wrong.
It's the control freaks that are having problems.
I know that.
But folks dont.
They believe human is bad. Look at religion.
Psychopaths are bad.
Posted using Partiko Android
You dont need to vote if you are voting for none.
If you want to vote for another option, the time for submission of proposals has passed.
Posted using Partiko Android
So I dont vote?
@freebornangel
Posted using Partiko Android
If you don't support any of the options, the thing to do would be to not vote.
But then I could have also not registered?
Posted using Partiko Android
Maybe they should do a second round with the top of this first round and an extra option to vote against both options?
We'll see what happens.
You could just write a comment with a single hashtag for H1 to make it huge and ask for 0.1% upvotes from people who choose none of the above then count the vests. For people to cheap to upvote 0.1%, you can allow comment votes
Posted using Partiko Android
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
I tried to focus on likelihood of success in advancing Steem in cryptoland and attracting investors and meaningful projects.
Here is my analysis for anybody interested.
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Good luck everyone!
Write in vote for @novacadian's minimalist proposal.
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemalliance/attention-community-here-are-your-choices-or-final-structure-proposals-that-will-go-to-the-vote#@novacadian/re-llfarms-re-novacadian-re-steemalliance-attention-community-here-are-your-choices-or-final-structure-proposals-that-will-go-to-the-vote-20190408t192754324z
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
Voted for
I think this project ideology is closest to my own, The question asked is who would I show support to. Supporting myself holds too much bias. I know it can succeed too. Of the other 4 proposals , I would support Incubator 1st.
Why aren't you voting for yourself as well?
and why am I not using all the accounts I have control over to vote too?
Cause it would make no difference, Even the blind can do Mathematics. Capping the vote at 250K to make the voting so called fair is a joke, when the cap is based on 1 Million user base and the active user base is 10K. The majority of the voting from the lower accounts is gone, The voting from all the large accounts is still present. Everything seems designed for an already chosen party to vote. The project to be selected to win will be the one made by those who were asked to be overseer's of the selection process. Everything screams in house, cloak and dagger.
A pyramid is being set up to control the foundation, A pyramid that feeds the top or private industry not the chain.
My own goals have been reached by expanding those that have heard about the concept I have proposed for over 1 year now.
Speaking of shit, I took a dump in your wallet! Take a trip to the bathroom to claim your worthless SHIT!
actually the 250k cap is on SP held. Reducing the influence of the higher stake holders spreads the influence out to more of the community. The number of accounts held on the platform is irrelevant.
I have been watching the difference in rankings between full stake and capped stake. There is a difference and it doesn't work in any particular groups favour except as influenced by the incoming votes. The impact has moved back and forth as the votes have come in.
on SP held is also including non active accounts.
I see. I don't know if 250k was the right level to cut it off, but its an interesting mechanism: stake 'to a certain point'.
I decided to vote with some of my accounts, even though it might not change the outcome. Voting is more of a social orient that a results orient for me anyway - at least 'in real life' I'm used to voting for the loveable losers.
You can actually compare the numbers through the filters on dpoll and no matter if you look at account voting (one vote per account), pure stake or the cap we focused on.. the results currently are the same.
The end result will be interesting to compare and use as an example for possible future voting and decision making etc. But currently, popular vote (one account/one vote) and the stake options are showing pretty close results. So, was there some other reason you felt differently? Or did you not look?
As far as the rest of your comment, I call bullshit. Everything is out in the open and nothing has been predecided.
This is an open election to get an idea of what the community would like to see this foundation be. The whole community.. because even if you think everyone who owns stake is evil in your eyes, they are also part of this community.
ALL community members matter and are voting in this election.
This isn’t leadership, it’s an idea of what type of foundation should be built. Then that idea will have to be implemented and will evolve over what is actually possible.
Everything has been open and transparent through this process by those selected (by the community) to “oversee” it. If you don’t want to support it, don’t. That’s your choice, but leave your bullshit at the door as there is no truth in it and it’s not beneficial for anyone.. especially the community.
Let's not go to the open and transparent while discussions behind closed chat rooms take place.
Everyone who holds a stake is not evil in my eyes. I read you as defensive and not of discussion. This can only be due to your own actions. Not the words I spoke. You are obviously not open to the possibility people do not all see the same thing in the same way.
Everyone else can have a point of view but me eh?
You do not have to agree with an opinion I form, You should be mature enough to accept I do not see everything the same way you do.
You're wasting your time mate
You could be right on that.
Or maybe I am not wasting it, and Simply sharing an idea. if others can grasp the size and rewards for the community from this concept, Then maybe the maybe turns around to maybe we can do this together.
I’m open to all discussion and was replying to your opinion that this process does not allow the community’s voice to be heard (as the numbers say otherwise) and call be on the accusations of those involved.
I’m sure many conversations happen privately all over discord and Steem, it’s called private messaging. All actions of the working group and Steem Alliance have been done in the open discord server. That is what I was pointing out, and it can be clearly seen for anyone who wants to look.
I do not believe people need to see things the same way as me and actually work pretty hard to ensure all opinions are heard and considered, even if I don’t agree with them. I will most definitely state when something is not factual though, if it pertains to something I’m involved in.. which is what I was doing. Stating your comment was not factual. Then I said you could support it or not, as that is your choice.
Opinions are great and always welcome, opinions based on facts are those that are the most beneficial though, for everyone.
Yes and about you all just put your own proposal together and ignore the rest. I heard about that.
The discussion an opinion bring is what counts not the opinion. All opinions no matter from when where or who they come from should be held equal.
If you cannot see how this opinion came about from the facts I hear about you saying to do your own proposal and skip the nonsense. How the post was published while you had ample opportunity to inform the rest of the community during a show that you had the intention to do so.
That you feel justified to override the community itself says so much. Which is basically what the committee to form a committee has done. not guide the process but be the process.
This again is just opinion. Everything I write is an opinion of mine generally.
Is debate really necessary?
Was it really necessary to attack me in your reply to begin with.
From that point onward it mattered not what you wrote. I held no respect for you from that attack.
I didn’t attack at all, in fact the opposite. There is no “let’s make our own and ignore the rest”, that is a silly statement. I gave input on a proposal, many actually, and have been extremely open about that.
Giving input on a proposal does not mean the others don’t count, as it’s up to the community to decide which idea they prefer, which is the point of this open election.
Even if I decided to make my own completely separate proposal (which I did think about), it still would be up to the community. More proposals give them more options, not less.
So, as I said, your opinion seems to be based on personal frustrations and not any factual events.
The goal here is to build the best foundation possible, with the best ideas brought forward, not to “win”.
More proposals, more collaborations and more ideas mean more options for the community and therefore a better end product.
The community is now giving their consensus on which idea they prefer, nothing more, nothing less.
It’s not pre-decided and there is no cloak and dagger, what you see is what you get.
If you don’t like the process, that’s fair. The volunteer group did their best, maybe it will be a learning experience for the community as a whole.
Have a good day.
Voted for
Voted for
i think this is a great initiative and best for implementation. you got my support