They shared my sentiments that while it may be open for everyone it really serves little purpose except to see if there are any bugs that will be potentiality detrimental once launched.
This is exactly what the testnet is for. It isn't to simulate behavior of the user group, that has to be done in the wild because even with significant amounts of users in the testnet, it won't replicate the reality and there will be a selection bias as the worst behaviors won't be present.
The "no one knows" component is exciting, isnt it? :D
Yes exciting indeed, and that is what I was eluding to that the testnet doesn't have a purpose that "anyone" would care about to "test" it. And that this reality and the no one knows aspect makes the test trivial for the average user.
I am pretty sure I could be a consensus witness on the testnet 😂
Yep, I understood what you meant. I wouldn't know what I am testing for but hopefully this time they have hired a few pro testers also for the case.
I also mentioned last time setting up a solid system for witnesses in case something goes wrong and and an interface that would aggregate witness positions and thoughts on the HF... What are the chances? :D
That would be most useful. Chances of worthwhile proposals being implemented might have a 10% chance of happening post fork 😉
Posted using Partiko Android
As long as there are 100 proposals, 10 good ones is all it takes. If you look at a normal distribution - we want to have things on the positive in the second and third bands.... 3rd band is 1 idea in 1000? 4th band in a million or something like that. :D