RE: Edit: I'm now running v0.22.1

[borislavzlatanov]

Dude, the community needs the community-selected witnesses to be running their nodes so that the community can vote on them and be represented. How long can Justin Sun keep control over all that stake and use it to vote for his witnesses? Not very long. We need the real witnesses to be up and running so we can support them. I hope you will re-activate your witness. The community resilience is VERY high and it will take a lot more to destroy it. First we have to think about what changes to the governance mechanism will prevent any single large stakeholder from centralizing the chain. And then we can think of how to implement those governance changes.

Comments

[lukestokes]

Dude, the community needs the community-selected witnesses to be running their nodes so that the community can vote on them and be represented.

I agree with your point here, but currently anyone supporting 22.2 is on a fork. Their efforts are useless. If I continue to run a node on that code, it's just off on a separate fork, not the real chain. I'd have to run 22.5 to get back into consensus but that doesn't exactly send a good message for voters who disagree with 22.5.

That said, I may use 0.22.4444 which @gtg is using, an unmodified version of 22.1 with just a slight change to the version signal.

How long can Justin Sun keep control over all that stake and use it to vote for his witnesses? Not very long.

I wish this were true, but people need to take their tokens off exchanges for this to really happen.

We need the real witnesses to be up and running so we can support them. I hope you will re-activate your witness.

If tokens remain on centralized exchanges, it won't matter.

The community resilience is VERY high and it will take a lot more to destroy it.

I hope so, but "hope" doesn't go very far when it comes to Byzantine Fault Tolerance. Code is law and humans choose which code to run and who to vote for.

[dhimmel]

If I continue to run a node on that code, it's just off on a separate fork, not the real chain. I'd have to run 22.5 to get back into consensus but that doesn't exactly send a good message for voters who disagree with 22.5.

Isn't this the crucial point. If the Steem community all says we are only going to accept 22.2 (whatever version restricts the STINC stake) as the real chain. Users, and the services they user, determine what protocol they would like to follow. In other words, can the actual productive portion of the Steem community agree that we'll stay on the pre-attack software version and let there be a fork.

[svamiva]

people need to take their tokens off exchanges for this to really happen.

It seem to be pretty obviously that binance will not allow that, the Steem wallet will be 'on maintenance' for now.
Or did they change the power down time to 'one week' already?