Not the same thing. As was pointed out, Ned isn't a hacker. He didn't steal his stake. If people don't like how he is using it, they should go create their own chain free of him instead of trying to take his away from him. If they can in good conscience take his stake, they could just as easily rationalize taking mine or yours.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Where does one draw the line? @ned makes the claim that the money is being used for development, and the community feels like this development is costing 10 times more than it should. If the community feels like this money is being stolen, then maybe it is. It's all a matter of opinion.
Of course this is all a thought-experiment because the fork is never going to happen. It's very obviously far too contentious to actually happen. In addition, that stake can be used to swap in pro-Steemit witnesses. How many witnesses need to agree on a fork? 17? Yeah, not going to happen.
Ah see well from the perspective of the DAO hacker and ETC, no theft occurred.
The rules of the contract were not broken.
The reason for rewriting the blockchain is irrelevant.
All that matters is if the community has the consensus to do it.
Of course, your points are valid, and we are on the same side. I would not vote to fork @ned's stake away. These arguments obviously make consensus harder to achieve.
At the same time I also respect consensus. I won't be a sore loser if my side doesn't win. Or maybe I will and the chain will fork. Depends on how big both communities are and how worth it the fork would be.