Good point, thanks for the input. I respectfully disagree and most of the time I would virtually always agree with the basis of your point. I don't like centralized entities making those decisions either. Well, at some point a centralized entity stops being one when they distribute their wealth/invest in the most promising venture to improve the individual/group perceived desired results. To make a long story short sitting on a giant pile of money right now with a massively dynamic open sourced idea like this one is an opportunity wasted and leads me to wonder how much more of an urgent situation needs to develop to use it, or if nothing else retire it from the available supply altogether. Right now these resources have certainly done one thing, absolutely nothing for the average user of Steemit to drum any kind of additional interest. Usually I could not agree more, but this central holding is a mandated long position for the cryptocurrency and could possibly boost greatly the exposure and fortunes of those involved in steemit. In a more contemporary 100% pure market based ideal that I think you and I would agree with quite a bit there is no Steem Inc and the millions of steem tokens are held by the users rather than already having a mandated long for the community rather than being able to be exchanged openly in a legitimate market setting. Either retire the steem or do something with it, the specter of more power downs by insiders certainly helps no one that wishes to create value over the long term here. Thanks again for the response, I love it when people bring compelling counter-arguments like this one!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
very good points on improvement of steemit ecosystem.
I agree with you here @cryptkeeper17. What do they have to lose and what do they have to gain? Sometimes making it simple is the best way to come to the right conclusion. In this case, I think it is very clear. With any research by actually talking to the users, they would come to the same conclusion.