It is not normal human nature to freely "vote" to reduce your income, i.e. why would the top 20 ever agree to this?
Because it's either lower or zero.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
It is not normal human nature to freely "vote" to reduce your income, i.e. why would the top 20 ever agree to this?
Because it's either lower or zero.
Yes, @dragosroua, understood from your post. But, perhaps we can expand on that.
"Lower or zero" is clear enough. It is getting a voting majority to acknowledge that is how bad it is first. Even then, if that day arrives, agreeing the solution is to voluntarily give up their income, as the consensus decision on the right solution. And, then, how voting for Witnesses follows afterwards ...
One thing is clear, at least to me (I greatly prefer candor, so I am open to any and all differences of opinion, as I might learn something ...), if it survives long-term, the Steem blockchain has a way to go to be decentralized to the point where a single "point of failure" cannot bring "the whole house down" ...
Right now, that "single point of failure" is Steemit, Inc. without which there would be no Steem blockchain to begin with, if I understand the history correctly. I hope the right decisions are taken, in the face of adversity, for the "Steemisphere" to survive. There should be no "too big to fail" portion of it ...
Thanks again dragosroua for taking the time to put this post together.