Delegations create subsidies, subsidies are not always a good thing. Delegations appear to continue to be allocated in a very hands-off manner, and steemit inc does not seem to have changed their stance on never writing up a written contract for anyone receiving a delegation.
Correct me if I'm wrong, and maybe there are actually hard requirements for any of the delegated parties to submit anything remotely resembling transparency reports of what they're doing with the delegations and how they go about doing things, other than voluntarily releases of information on their administrative activities.
That's problematic because so many of the issues revolving around the delegations in the past and present could have been prevented in the first place if they were to have gone the contract route. I'm guessing it's a carry-over mentality of avoiding contracts and anything that smells ICO or securities/IPO-related so they don't get hit by any regulations, considering they're based in the US.
Are you suddenly expecting Ned to be the controller of what is successful on the entire blockchain?
I don't want Ned to decide what is worthy. And... I find him to be very bland. I want him to delegate to lots of people/projects for diversity reasons. I want them all to try different things.
It is an experiment.
I agree :) We don't need to be the bitcoin community worshipping the grounds of the white paper and Nakamoto, respect them but please do not use then as evidence they are made by humans.
@dan is Nakamoto of steem, @ned is the Roger Ver of steem :D whatsup @whatsup
So whos adam black ;)