@starkerz Thanks for this post. I have to say after reading @jerrybanfield's whitepaper with a detailed proposal on how to reverse the spiral of Steem, I've reached a conclusion which I've speculated on for a while.
Basically, Witnesses need to become a decision-making board. As is, I consider them a 'multiplexed' suggestion box with little power for real change.
I don't want to go down that path; but, bottom line: I sense that participants of both Steemit and Steem are 'success stories' currently, and in the making.
Again, thanks for this post!
Peace.
Thanks for this! interesting idea about the witnesses, also interested to know your thoughts on how this would improve steem. Would it not be worth electing another board of users to be decision makers?
As is, the decision-making process seems top-heavy. Many noteworthy proposals are being made for improving the Steemit platform in order to ultimately grow STEEM; but seemingly those making the proposals aren’t really being heard.
I think the fewer ‘boards’ we have, the fewer conflicts. Perhaps, you could share why you deem a need for ‘electing’ another board.
Again, as is, without it being mandatory, too few Steemians are participating in the witness-selection process, by personal choice, or proxy. So, the thought of another ‘election’ makes me dizzy, lol, and smh simultaneously. I think it becomes a case of KIS…
Peace.
understood. interesting point! iam intersted to see this dicussion develop going forwards
✌!