From my point of view, this is it ok, I would invest in steem if it was only 1 token, steem, I said this at the start, I reiterate that point, this though is only my view, you and smooth both have more followers than me, and you could, if you wanted, do a poll, to see who wants, is in favour of SBD, and who is not, I did this, and got a resounding 100% against SBD, though you could argue and rightly so that I have very few followers, and that would be correct.
Now for the status quo bit, .
They are, but indirectly. Witnesses work for the stakeholders. Stakeholders want to protect and grow the value of their stake which, at present, includes wanting to grow the user base (which includes communities and content providers).
If, hypothetically, stakeholders decide that users, communities and/or content providers are not a positive force in protecting and growing the value of their stake, and want to change priorities accordingly, there is nothing witnesses can do to stop that. Any witnesses who try will just be voted out.
Bottom line, this is a system based on stakeholder authority and interests ultimately. Everyone needs to decide whether they are on board with that. No one can force you.
As I understand it there are 47 whales, I may be wrong, I can only rely on people like abh12345, and when 47 people control a platform that wants millions of people, yet wants to only service, upvote those they like, circle jerk, know, the system has zero chance to survive.
there is nothing witnesses can do to stop that. Any witnesses who try will just be voted out.
Quotes from smooth not me.
If you want a fair and sound system, people should be looking at quality of articles, write ups, and voting at present it is not working that way, steemit is a reflection of the real world, those with mined stake, the most power are making the rules, was this the intention? you tell me.
When quotes like that are banded about.
there is nothing witnesses can do to stop that. Any witnesses who try will just be voted out.
By smooth, it reminds me again of politicians, tow the line or else, and that I do not like, that is the way I am, you can choose to be what you like, a frog even if it suits today, I care not, I am though talking about my point of view, not yours.
The system of governance that we have is not perfect, but IMO it is the best option that there is. Those with the most stake have the most to lose, and are therefore given the most authority over decisions. It is not a guarantee that they will make the right ones. Unfortunately a fully democratic process (along the lines of one user, one vote) is worse since 1. it gives way more power to people who may not really care about what happens since they have little to no vested interest, and 2. it is gamable by abusers who will create multiple accounts to have multiple votes. Finding a system that is perfectly fair and will make everyone happy is probably unachievable.
Like haejin has done for months/years?
No, because the system does NOT work on a one account, one vote basis. Creating multiple accounts does NOT convey any advantage haejin nor anyone else.
I don't know how many 'whales' there. The cutoff between whale and non-whale seems pretty arbitrary to me. For example, when I look at my votes received on steemdb:
So, yes SP matters and if you want to have voting influence you will need to buy SP or earn SP, but the idea that only 47 whales' votes matter is wrong.