If you are learning from past mistakes of the DPoS experiment then my recommmendation would be to leave the old baggage behind. Perhaps start all existing accounts off at 500SPs.
That sounds nice but it doesn't work as well. The new blockchain needs the financial support of some whales, else it fails. Because someone has to pay for equipment.
@blocktrades already said he is working on a better REP system. My guess is the the new chain as a "carbon copy" of the current STEEM DPoS implementation is just the start.
The implementation and even DPoS itself should evolve from there.
They already are aware that without further development it will fail. This very blog post says so.
Putting funds in the SPS system will eliminate the need for whales. In my opinion, the choice to bring the baggage is for self interests not anything as practical as you are suggesting.
@ned->@justinsumsteemit->@freedom
I have to be honest with you, as libertarian I do believe self interest to be a virtue.
If a social blockchain is created on self interest by its founders, then they need to implement a protocol in such a way that will benefit them. But to get that benefit, they need HUMAN users. The more users, the more benefit.
If you create a failed set of rules on that new social blockchain, well, they will harm their self-interests.
So I don't see an issue there. Either their develop a good social blockchain or a shitty product. Time will tell.
I myself prefer a social blockchain by @blocktrades than by @justinsunsteemit , but also already explained what I envision as an ideal protocol for a social blockchain (wont publish the link again).
But not everyone has resources to put theory into reality. I don't have enough resources to build an ideal (in my vision) social blockchain, so only can suggest others a couple of ideas and wish for their success.
That seems understandable to me, in the sense that we have all been attracted to STEEM for many reasons.
Mine was primarily the technology. An Experiment as Dan Larimer called it. It has been found to have a serious weakness. To have another kick at the can and bring along the old baggage of economics seems not to be driven as a scientific experiment. Instead of offering a true egalitarian start up to the community that has come together over the last 4 years this development has as its primary focus capitalistic profit as a guiding star.
Getting currency out of tokens is difficult.
That does not sound like the philosophy of Open Source Programmers to me. Maybe your point is in terms of a Libertarian?
Decentralization may make demands on our concepts of property.
A reboot is done when using software to reset the data not to carry it forward normally. From my experience anyway...
How come not? You are free to create your own version of STEEM, with all accounts reset to 500 SP and that would be an "egalitarian start up "
I probably wont do much there but power down my freebie share and dump, because it wont be (in my view) a sustainable blockchain. But I may be proven wrong. I am not against any fork. That's the easy part.
I known I can't fork STEEM and apply my own protocol vision, I don't have the resources, time, etc.
So, I'm onboard HIVE. Why should I have the same share as others? It doesn't make sense to me.
The level of success of the new chain will be proportional to the level of justice. But egalitarian economics is not about justice, is about communism. I don't want to be rewarded at the same level of people putting more work into that.
Also if the new social blockchain is based on an unfair system, it will be fail too.
@blocktrades et. all are doing an emergency fork after an attack. That is a starting point. They claim have learned from 4 years time experience what is wrong with STEEM. They have an opportunity to develop something better.
I can't be against that. Time is ticking out.
Well said, and no disrespect meant at the effort underway with this project, if that is how it may have appeared to you.