deleted
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
deleted
I need to drive home, and then can concentrate further on these issues.
So-called decentralised governance is the biggest blockchain failure, an its continued promotion must be considered a philosophical con.
Decentralised governance is like liberal democracy - used around the world to weaken governments by collusion and bribes and thus creating oligarchies and tyrannies. In crypto, we could write a Crypto Economic Hitman manual as so many gov disasters have already happened.
Most users just want things to work - their freedoms of speech protected by the rules of the chain - protected by the philosophy of the creators of the chain. The only people yelling about so-called decentralisation are those who know it will be a step towards tyranny - their tyranny. This has happened elsewhere - it always happens.
Look around - why would anybody wish to place their freedoms into the hands of a consensus mechanism based on stake - on money - look around the world - how is THAT working out?
Be very careful what one wishes for. Firstly, UNDERSTAND what it really means and what will be the consequences.
It would be nice to see, in addition to the 7/7/22 decentralization decision, a detailed report on BF earnings and expenses. Reviewing the activity of the socialgraph account raises many questions and concerns. For example, why do you receive 200K BLURT per month? I am not accusing anyone of anything. Just saying, it would be nice if the Foundation would openly inform the community on what it spends printed BLURT
I agree with you, however there was a contract written by the founders that I believe many of us were unaware of the specifics of.
I don't believe in the pie in the sky idea of decentralization anymore than I do this shit show they call democracy in the U.S. that only seems to find concensus in areas that make the nation weak and steal from our pockets quicker and deeper by the year.
But sadly there was a contract made that has now went almost full term without any public discussions or votes.
Isn't it amazing how nobody bothered to do some basic research!?
https://blurt.blog/blurt/@rycharde/where-is-the-regent
And I'm certainly not pointing at any one person - not enough fingers.
It's not as simple as that, and I've spent hours before writing this post researching. As well as watching and evaluating things that are being said (and not said) as this continues to drag out.
I'm for now going to continue holding my cards close, other than to say there are some valid questions and criticisms involving what that regency allowed and has done. As well as that final separation.
I say all of this as one who would prefer the Foundation to continue on it their role. But it doesn't matter much in the larger scheme what I want, that I don't look forward to a large whale ownership that could see shit like flags introduced, math formulas that give them the lions share, etc, as we see elsewhere.
There was a contract put into place that many of us, (witnesses included it seems) were unaware of. It's my hope that some valid questions are answered and a move towards resolving this with a fair witness vote will take place that can put this to bed one way or another in a way that would retain respect from onlookers whichever way it falls.
As before, I am not gonna write a long comment,
It were they who moved and you stayed.
Now, don't move because they are coming back.
If you do, you are losing your hard-earned tokens to someone who is there just to create negativity.
The only thing, we need to do is hold on to it, and everything is good.
And believe me, There is no reason to come back to a dying ship, until, it's the only one not dying.
I think you may get my point now, Just don't leave yet.
Thanks
It's not as simple as that.
There is a contract involved.
There are growing allegations of fraud.
This is all being given fertilizer the longer the positions being presented by the most powerful accounts at Blurt are ignored.
I don't know what is under the band aid that is the cause of this seeming avoidance to settle this matter instead of letting it fester as daily I watch more insinuations and potential accusations. But it seems clear to me that until such time as this bandaid it ripped off whatever is beneath it will continue to get infected more.
There needs to be some kind of discussion among witnesses.
And even saying that there would be questions on the validity of the witness positions due to there not being the 104 week decay (in effect watering down the Foundation witness vote power to 3 weeks worth of power).
And I say that not because I want a Foundationless Blurt, but it's really easy to see the positions being stated and conclude their next logical step under different scenarios.
I really wish this all could have been put to the community and vote awhile ago, instead of allowing it to sneak up on us with little time to prepare for the worst.
This is serious, and despite the motives of the one who brought this forward has no impact on the validity. This should have been an understandable anticipation and accounted for long ago.
Was it an actual contract? Or was it a statement and wish in the white paper and initial plan for Blurt. There is a big difference. As a business person who has put together many business plans even the best ones change and adapt to what happens on the ground. I think the only failure of the foundation here is identifying that statement and addressing it with some communication.
As for people taking things so personal like a promise was broken I do not agree with that and it is not that simple. I think that someone came on here and stirred things up because of their own bitterness spread some FUD. Until we have a good statement from the foundation all the guessing and fear is not warranted especially sell offs and power downs.
This same person who is asking for a decentralized network is the same that is trying to control peoples property and these last two posts are just a tantrum as far as I can see. This person was given options to make their own community with his own rules if he wanted to put his money where his mouth is. But rather he just seems bound to want to rubbish what we have here with some hypocrisy. I had a level of respect for how things ended before even though he took his ball and went home he has that right but to come back here and try to spoil it for others I don't agree with. If his heart was in the right place he would have started his conversation with Jacob and Megadrive just the same way his whole issue started in the first place.
So I beg of you @practicalthought to also not add fuel to the fire at this point. The foundation at times is slow to make things clear as to their position but I think this is a good leadership (or parenting technique) also it allows them to measure public sentiment and also talk to witnesses and other stake holders before coming out and just making a decree also. No one wants that and good inclusive decisions also take time, thought and coordination with others. That is also all part of decentralization, and a working decentralization not a pie in the sky decentralization that just favors large stake holders.
I think we will find like most of the other issues that have come up in the last few months that the foundation will take a very soft handed approach and conservative approach and little will change. I am sure they will have a heart to heart with the witnesses and if a vote is needed there will be an extension or another plan with timeline put in place for what the future of the foundation will be. I think that this is a strength of the leadership here they are not afraid of the community sharing their concerns but then will put the faith in there that blurt was built how it was built for a reason and make minor tweaks if needed but we are not going to see big changes.
Don't play into the fear.
I'm repeating myself a lot so will first share this with you.
https://blurt.blog/dao/@socialgraph/socialgraph-foundation-to-custody-dao-funds
And say that if you begin sifting through large whales comments here there is talk of fraud and lawsuits if this is not honored. I say all of this as someone who prefers the Foundation stay. But I wont stick my head in the sand because of what I want as opposed to what looks like what is. Here are two comments I made on this this morning.
https://blurt.blog/polish/@practicalthought/rdiw9c
https://blurt.blog/blurt/@practicalthought/rdiwzj
I don't know much about how the foundation works but transparency is always welcomed.
There is always a possibility that Blurt goes to zero but the heartbeat of this platform is the community. If we can resolve differences then we have gained the world. Developments in tech are important but what good is a new car if they driver is on the wrong road? If the taste of Blurt is bitterness, resentment and superficiality then the community is on the wrong path. What I liked about Blurt was a small international community who supported each other and acknowledged differences with respect. I hope Blurt would shine... there is still some chance. Do you know CPR?
I agree. But it will never be possible to resolve differences if either side refuses to openly engage in an honest conversation. Until I see that there is a willingness to discuss valid positions instead of what appears to be an ignoring of them then nothing can get resolved, and by the act of ignoring them most likely will tear the very fabric apart that is hoped to be salvaged.
I don't like this one bit, and I say that as one who would see the Foundation continue steering this ship. But they were the ones who drafted the rules, and they've had two years almost to prepare for what is coming. I don't want to say to much more on this because it's my hopes that there will be a point by point acknowledgement and discussion from them on how we proceed from here.
I mentioned elsewhere that if the chain was to become a large stakeholders wile west and they were to move on to a new chain/project I would follow them. That sentiment is quickly dissipating.
I may say more on this again ( I probably will) however I put the gauntlet down already and need to wait so as to allow the major players to make their moves.
Thanks for clearing up a few things. I wouldn't be surprised if the foundation came up with a solution in accordance with their original proposal for changes in July. It's just hard to see beyond the ego. It's still just as clear as a Spring Day in Newfoundland.
Bitters eh ?
Source: https://amzn.to/3OdQ2Yl
Looks like this bitter medicine is a cure all for everyone.
I have been here long, but I'm already uncertain about whether it's worth sticking around, and not just for reasons you highlight above. Certainly, such uncertainty removes a little hope for this being an alternative place to call home with potential to be something as awesome as it could be. Protecting your investment sounds wise. I don't think it can be an easy thing to drive a platform like this, but surely there's a visionary out there that can get it right and stick it out, with the funds to do so as well as the passion and dev skills. Here's hoping. 🦄
The crap double-u posted was pure FUD.
Nice to know. A shame none of these front ends are without dramas!
I think I am going to create a new Steemit Fork …. nodrama.blog
No airdrop, no drama.
Just good, wholesome blogging fun
I think I need a better name.
Any ideas ?
boring.com
:P
I see where you’re coming from …. Ha ha ha ha…. Lol.com
Haha.. it's hard to imagine a platform without drama!
I will create one though. It’s super easy.
clear. With clear token. Clear power. To clear all the old mindset that was created before. The same with voting power, upvotes, voting for witnesses, but everything from scratch. No airdrops, no hidden things, new white paper, new goals, complete freedom, but you'll need a lot of developers for that. That's not an easy task. And maybe the programming language there should be easier, where you can find even freelancers working on the blockchain, not Python I think it's called here, but something more popular like java or c++. I'm not good at that, but generally what I heard about. Clear.blog , nice name. lol
That’s a great idea. We start from zero. Nothing and build from scratch. Everyone has to kick in a lot of money to pay for everything though since we need to start from zero. Developers will need minimum $100, 000 a year and we will probably need 4.
https://blurt.blog/blockchain/@offgridlife/i-m-starting-a-new-blockchain-from-scratch-it-will-be-called-freedom
It will be 100% decentralized… 100% Free Speech and 100% Offgrid….
https://blurt.blog/offgrid/@offgridlife/i-m-building-a-new-100-decentralized-and-off-the-grid-crypto-blogging-platform-called-offgrid-blog
Hello, good afternoon, I must affirm that you have not been the only one surprised when reading the publication of the dismissal of the regent; I had heard something a year ago but I didn't know it worked this way. And according to my criteria and appreciation I can only assume, like you, some valid points in this whole process, I believe and consider that it should be the foundation that issues a statement in order to clear up doubts and establish a starting point.
I share the idea that if there is a cessation of functions, it cannot and should not be a spoiled process in which what has been built is destroyed, for which we must always start from respect for the foundation to be able to start conversations of any type, additional would you break your best card to start from scratch? no contacts? without help? without experience?
With this I do not want to speak on behalf of anyone, I just want to express that despite being a neophyte in many things, at this point we must have a broad vision of the possible scenarios for Blurt to continue on its way.
There should be a function that forces a top 20 witness to demonstrate a knowledge of the rules they are witnessing. This is in no way a criticism of yourself. It should have been built into the chain as a code requirement.
Contrary to assertions I've seen on other chains, that a witness has no responsibility to the community other than witnessing this is a catastrophe waiting to happen based on the voting power that witnesses have. It was a clear demonstration of the power a witness has in the Justin Sun Steemit war, and on a much more minor scale here with the VTS war. There should be a mechanism in place to ensure that those entrusted with the future of the project hold a complete understanding with what it is they are tasked with maintaining.
As one who has little faith in what a so called decentralized free for all would mean (land barons anyone) I didn't write these rules and as I mentioned almost 1 day ago exactly here I so far see little effort to acknowledge some of the points that have been made, and the many more that are likely coming.
I've always been one to try to own my mistakes, regardless of the cost. After all of these years, with the results I've witnessed from this approach I can say this. Many times while it's true that the ownership involved taking my bad medicine, having done otherwise would have ensured much worse. Sure, there were plenty of times I could have probably avoided the medicine by keeping my head down and pretending ignorance, but not only isn't that the right thing to do as I mentioned just now, the results on the times I wouldn't have would likely have been much more costly than they were.
Someone better do something soon. If the Foundation is to remain in power, it needs to be done correctly. I'm going to wait a few more days before discussing this again. To give the parties involved more time to right their positions. I deeply hope that there will not be such a compromise of honor in this that it ruins many going forward from being able to conduct themselves in any new projects if that road needs taken. I mentioned elsewhere that if this became a free for all and the Foundation was/is booted I would follow them. I now qualify that to say it actually depends on how much ownership is taken here for the rules of the game they put on the table.
I wish Jacob could come weigh in on this matter. He is the reason I even decided to try one more time with a stake based crypto. When I decided to leave Hive, I was done and just waiting in the hopes Hive would go up from around .12-.14 each. If this isn't resolved quickly in a manner that acknowledges all positions, even those we may not care for, I think I'm likely done with crypto.
I can understand his annoyance in these situations, especially when he has contributed a lot of himself to build something. My comment did not seek to escape from the commitment made to the community, I think I am one of the few who has suffered the attacks for issuing their own opinions despite being able to lose the position that I have at this time. Like you, I have been documenting myself and, above all, understanding the possible scenarios that we can face in the near future, however, my logic leads me to say the following:
The first publication I read today stated that nothing would happen on a certain date, but if we see the response issued in the post that starts the debate, it clearly says that the background damage or blurt is not delivered, or what should be recorded for having an immature community, for which this argument overturns any other, it is evidence that admits that obviously on that date a certain deadline should be met but that there is no intention of doing so for the benefit of the platform, but then From reading some comments I see that there is even talk of a possible extension of 1 year but this does not appear in large publications. And that is where I clearly think that there should be a more solid statement
some opinions indicate that the best card to keep Blurt running is the foundation, after 2 years of supporting so many things it is evident that they are more than qualified to continue with this project, but they say that you die being a hero or you live what enough to make you a villain. Therefore, a possible extension of all this can generate discomfort with investors or whales.
Is it possible that Blurt can survive without the foundation? It is only possible if the strong investors AKA whales really want to take that step (so far nobody says I will do it), added that it should be a friendly process because it is well known that the foundation is immersed in many projects that in the long run can be beneficial not to mention the contacts and previous work done by them. At this point the million dollar question is who decides to support whom or if we should have a common goal so that this does not become a battle without winners. Therefore, we must always start from the respect that we must have towards all those who live here.
The technical aspect at this point matters less than the human aspect, without any kind of understanding we could be facing a complicated scenario for everything we have built here.
The truth is I really didn't know about this fact about 07/07/2022 before it was published by double-u..I don't know what kind of his intentions behind the scene..I don't no he have plans for blurt in the future or not..But I was keen about the posts and comments going over last few days about this topic..I was going through most of those posts and specially with the comments also..What I felt was there are some people like ctime who wants to do the exact thing which promised two years back..But current devs like tekraze and the cofounder's (megadrive) words make me feel like if we really close the BF if the double-u takes the places then above people will leave this place.. At this place we need more discussions and solutions for the matter..In my opinion, I don't like BF close at this stage because we are still not in a position to go alone. Because I don't see a good technical background like hive has with lot's of devs. But we may need some changes in the BF. Someone can say I talk this way because I have the witness vote from the Foundation..But I am ok to give up that anytime if we can stop these fuds and to protect the Platform. It's better to gather all active witnesses,devs, whales and users who really concern about the platform to discuss this matter as a one group and then we can have a better solution. Even someone said this is centralized platform which control by one person, I didn't feel that until today even I am here more than 6 months now. I still feels the Blurt is the Safe place than other blockchains like Steemit. So let's discuss..let's add everyone ideas and it will lead to the best solution for this.
While I am not optimistic about the survival of Blurt without the Foundations role, there are valid points being asked and raised regarding the inertial contract that was given at Blurts inception. Avoiding putting things to a vote (a fair vote) will only damage what is an already damaging position. I'm unsure of how this is going to end well, regardless of my desires for it to be so.
I've tried to point out the calamity their stepping away would bring.
I've also tried pointing out the damage that is being done by dragging this out. Those who are demanding the Foundation honor their original stated intentions are raising more questions the longer this thing drags out. It's time to put this thing to rest, one way or another. It's not going to just go away, and I say that as one who would prefer the Foundation to continue on in its role. But my preference doesn't negate that original contract and this is turning into a black eye that is getting darker by the day.
You have fallen for the FUD.
Some people want you to sell your Blurt for Cheap.
And you have fallen for their trap. IMHO
Yes we need to keep this in mind too.
These people want the weak hands to power down and sell their blurt for cheap… so that they can buy it for cheap…. and some people are falling for it.
I have bought more Blurt today. In my heart I believe everything will work out to the betterment of Blurt.
Me too. I am buying every dip. The more it dips the more I buy.
I’d like to have 100 million blurt some day.
Blurt is the best there is. It’s why so many people want to take it over. It’s headed for $1000
I can guarantee you that double-u didn't plot all of this so he could scoop up lots of cheap tokens on a chain he detests how is run. His intent only makes sense from the context of he had a strong conflict of wills that turned nasty with mega and by default, the foundational extension of most of the employees.
From my view, he hoped for ideally the ouster of the man who in his eyes ruined the entire Blurt project. My odds with him here is he gave zero attention to what would replace the Foundation if there wasn't any formal vote by witnesses to extend the stewardship and the Foundation dissolved and decides to just leave.
While I have found myself multiple times at odds with double-u over our views and positions, it needs to be clear that he came here with a weapon of knowledge. Knowledge that it seems most of us were unaware of as far as dates and obligations.
From those of you within the structure of the Foundation to the witnesses here should have had the foresight to prepare for this fast approaching deadline that was written by the founders.
I say all of this as one who is deeply upset that everything seems to be unraveling, that there is a failure to concede what is written as far as the full ramifications.
In a perfect world that I would have constructed (aka fantasy land) that bit about the two year decaying power wouldn't have been put in. That there wouldn't have been this commitment to overseeing the stability for two years and then allow for lack of a better phrase, a large stakeholder free for all where anything can be put in, even placing flags like the other chains have if the largest stakeholders desire.
This isn't just going to go away just because double-u was the messenger. Just because his delivery method was more of an "I gotcha now bitch" tone doesn't mean that he didn't bring any semblance of the truth to the table. He came with a good weapon the more I've looked over this. And just because I'm bothered by all that entails and his motives doesn't mean I put my head in the sand and dismiss his weapon.
I hadn't meant to write so much, I'm trying to hold back for a few more days if I can contain myself to give everyone more rope to see where they take it. So far I haven't been filled with confidence with what is being done with the rope.
Ok… look, we are not all Graphene blockchain code experts or developers. I have no idea what any of this even means. I help out with Twitter, Instagram, YouTube … and some graphics, that’s it that’s all. I really don’t know anything about this and really don’t care. But obviously a lot of people do care,so hopefully you get the answers you are looking for.
On another note I saw what happened with another Graphene project that was completely decentralized… no leadership, no developers, no guidelines, no governance, nothing … and it imploded within a year.
I'm not a strong advocate for decentralization. My stance is pro Foundation to continue on over the lack of alternatives. However, they wrote this contract and it can't just be ignored. That has led us into this position that looks worse by the hour.
I don’t remember signing any contract. Where can I read this contract ?
https://blurt.blog/dao/@socialgraph/socialgraph-foundation-to-custody-dao-funds
What a heart-felt write up.
But my question is, is blurt really heading toward better directions?, Since people have started loosing faith in their project here on blurt.
As you likely puts it
Right now Blurt seems to be in a limbo until clear cut positions are declared. Then those of us who are the lower tier of stakeholders can determine if we would even want to be a part of any of the positions.
Right now we seem to be along for a ride that has no clear destination point being offered. The only thing that seems certain is regardless of most choices there is going to be a lot of damage done because no one in any position of power here tried initiating this dialogue many months ago and seem unwilling to use an offered common ground such as my last post to concede any positions while also not for the most part outright declaring the hard lines in the sand.
Sadly this looks to get ugly based on actions and reactions, which isn't good for any of us nor the chain.
I won't add my personal comment all things are in the comments section. Many people many minds. Best of luck Blurt!
Congratulations!! your post has been curated by @blurt-network
Use #blurt-network for more upvotes
SHARE THIS POST ON FACEBOOK TO EARN BLURT FROM BLURT-NETWORK
Follow Blurt-networkFacebook page Here
You can delegate blurt power to @blurt-network to support curation
We invite you to use the tag #blurthispano. You can find us on Discord.
Manually curated by Geeklania.
We invite you to vote for @blurthispano as Witness.
Posted from https://blurtlatam.com
Until yesterday, I had never heard of this 'deadline'! I am very sad about the whole situation, especially in my role as witness.
I think Blurt is doing a great job in developing at the moment. My biggest fear though, is that maybe @ctime will be leaving us!
He has done so much for the community with his awesome voting and has also generously supported my witness. This will all be gone, if nothing changes on the 07.07. ...
Here his comment on the issue: https://blurt.blog/blurt/@ctime/rdds07
To be frank: I am absolutely speechless and very very sad...
While the impact of C-time leaving would be harmful, that is only one of many worries that we are facing here. I'm stunned this wasn't dealt with long ago, by calling for a witness vote for an extension and making plans and implementing paths forward in the case that the demand to honor that initial contract were demanded.
I say all of this as one who would prefer the Foundation consider their custodial role. Sadly I didn't write that initial contract and the time to pay up on it fast approaches with no preparations.
I understand @ctime, but it would be the wrong time to kick out the Foundation altogether.. We need a step-by-step plan. That would be my vote, if somebody asked me.. I had a look at these witness votes by @socialgraph... I don't have one...
Yes, we need a plan.
I just left this comment on a discussion I'm having for one of our other largest stakeholders on this who is advocating for the separation from the Foundation.
https://blurt.blog/polish/@practicalthought/rdiw9c
What I do know is that this was put into writing almost two years ago. I've seen discussion on possible lawsuits for fraud if it's not honored. None of this is pie in the sky. I believe that there may still be an option for a witness vote to give an extension. However, there are accusations being made that the witness votes from them have never decayed as promised. So if that portion is true, then in order to make this a witness vote that would avoid all appearance of foul play (the vote is rigged) then the witnesses positions would need adjusting before such a vote is made.
Unfortunately this matter has been allowed to close in on the target date with no planning for it from any side. In an ideal world the Foundation would have either taken steps long ago to seek at minimum an extension, or they would have been seeking a discussion with the community on how exactly this transfer would occur that would be palatable to the majority because it would have looked for some way this could actually be done. I don't even see how this can be done if you look at the comment I made i just linked here for you.
I honestly see we're fucked and gonna take some major hits however this falls out. I don't think we can just say,
While I agree that its obvious to myself this is a gotcha because of how badly things got between himself and megadrive, we can't ignore that initial opening promise from the Foundation. Many of our largest stakeholders are demanding their promised places as the top of this chain in decentralized utopia (for them). It was promised. Doesn't matter that most of us were unaware of this until a scant few days ago.
I don't see how this would end well in court if folks who put in lots of money (courts could give a shit about those of us who put in just a little money even if it was a lot to us) say they were lied to and never would have invested had the promise not been made before they invested.
The time is running out to try to reach some kind of compromise, and I say all of this as one who want's the Foundation to continue on as the stewards of this project. I can't even imagine how anything would run without someone running something. The infrastructure needs to be in someones name or the companies who provide these services wont provide them.
Ok, I read your comment... And all the others... And to be honest... I didn't like, what I was reading there...
You have my word on the following as a witness (and I will stand to my word! ): In the long run (step-by-step) , the Foundation should have the goal to solemnly restrict its tasks to the technical support and development of the Blurt platform, of course receiving funds for these tasks! Everything else should be dissolved in the long run!
Maybe my opinion might not really be liked by some of the top witnesses here, but it is my honest opinion, coming from the heart!
Edit: @clixmoney asks in another thread, if there are public statements to these topics... I would of course be interested in reading them too....
Much of my loss of confidence is because of the lack of any real statements of substance other than the growing attacks on conduct being made against the Foundation that are largely going unanswered.
Yes, I understand! The Foundation has to make a statement.
I dont see a promise in the DAO post from 2 years ago. I see an explanation of how blockchains can be created, and idea for a company to create them. And an explanation of how blurt has been programmed off of what had been created at steemit.
"The Burt blockchain inherited the Steem Proposal system, also known as the DAO, which gets funded at a rate of circa 433 Blurt per hour, traditionally developers, marketers and project owners could issue proposals and get them funded. The issue there is that the funding is not guaranteed and midway through development the funding could be cut off by community voting in favour of a return proposal or simply deciding to no longer support the development in favour of something else."
I read this as saying that things will continue the same in terms of the funding of the foundation unless it is voted to cease the funding. This was a potential weakness of the chain, so a regent account had been created to hold it for a certain time. This was not a promise that one day the whales can use their vote to steer the witness votes how they want. If it is time for a witness vote on if the foundation should continue funding then so be it, but that would be a stupid decision for any witness to make. And if it goes the wrong way the foundation is in their right to take witnesses that agree with them and for, or the ones that want something different can fork.
Nothing is broken here as far as I can see.
That was applicable 2 years ago when there was only a few holders of stake. There are now many holders of stake and a vote would be more balanced along the players that be. If it went to voting now the foundation would still sit in the same place probably without the regent vote. If for one a vote is even called and the witnesses decide to keep things as it is nothing changes.
If they don't I could then see cause for concern as then the blockchain can be controlled by a cobal as we have seen else where. That is when we might see a fork or the foundation decide to take their talent to a new project.
So far I have not see anyone asking for a witness vote of this kind other then someone who is bitter and wants to burn blurt. Even if he does still have most of his holding it may not be enough still to make a difference.
I've been asking loosely for some kind of vote for days now, even some real commentary from witnesses and the Foundation. I'm not sure why this is being allowed to continue on without nipping it in the bud one way or another. The whales advocating for the stepping away aren't stopping their calls, they are escalating it with more accusations and nods of seeking legal remedy.
This needs dealt with, it's not going away. And the longer it's allowed to fester is bad.
I knew this was too good to be true -- just more politicking by a bunch of assholes with delusions of grandeur!!!
We'll see no later than 23 days from now how this concludes. It will be a shame if it gets any time near that 23 day deadline for some kind of conclusion to be agreed upon. Just as it's a shame this wasn't addressed some time back before we got to this point.
Congratulations, your post has been curated by @techclub
Manually curated by
@chibuzorwisdom
Also, keep in touch with Blurtconnect-ng family on Telegram and Whatsapp
Congratulations, your post has been curated by @techclub
@samhenrytenplus
Where is that promise everyone is talking about ? I can't find that in the white paper, or in a post written by foundation. If such link will not be provided or where to read that, so it's really a FUD like @offgridlife said.
I provided it once before on my post before this one that you voted on.
Here it is again.
https://blurt.blog/dao/@socialgraph/socialgraph-foundation-to-custody-dao-funds
wow, I understand now why proposals weren't working when I wrote the following : Funding projects in blurt ! [PROPOSAL]. Do you mean that proposals should start working after those 2 years pass ? I mean is that what's written in that post and what @double-u wants ?
I also saw @drutter asking some questions about printed blurt. Maybe that post will also answer his questions. Interesting.
Edited to add:
I'm guessing they (proposals) should have always worked and I assumed they were. I assumed such because no one has ever complained about misuse. The wordage suggests that they started with a large say in the Dao and with each month their administration power over it would decay. So for example we are around 3 weeks from the stated deadline. They should at most only have whatever fraction 1 out of the 24 months would give them based on the initial 50% stated in that declaration.
I'm ignorant on funding processes. Here is what I do know.
In my time here I've never witnessed any formal process anyone followed to fund a project from the Dao. There has been funding however it seems to me that in most every case I saw involved a statement from the Foundation that it was being given. I'm not sure how this was arrived at. The latest seems to be a man who is selling Blurt shoes. I forget his name but he was hitting me up for help in my second to last post I believe which is how I heard of it.
I qualify my understanding based on my ignorance. I don't do projects so unless they are thrust in my face from someone I follow I would by default remain oblivious.
If I remember well, @imransoudagar told me that proposals can work if I'll contact the team and tell them about the project I would like to create. Otherwise, I tried to write a proposal here : https://ecosynthesizer.com/blurt/proposals and I couldn't. That didn't work for me. Of course, I hope to see there a lot of proposals, that will make the blockchain very attractive for me as an investor and I could put a lot of money in blurt. By the way if anyone wants people to buy blurt, by activating those proposals they will push people to buy more blurt, and that may push the price up.
Proposals were always welcome but it was never marketed.
People have been writing proposals in Blurt since day 1.
In the beginning... People wrote proposals to get delegations to start curating content.
Eventually the foundation stopped giving Delegations as they were being misused.
I think there were a total of 27 curation accounts.
@Nabeeel recently received 30,000 Blurt to start making Blurt branded footwear.
And let me clarify that there is no need to submit a proposal on the Ecosynthesizer website. Anyone can write a post and send it to the team.
Ok, I hope people will start writing proposals not related to curation or delegation. It's also interesting to know about more of those projects who get funded after writing a proposal.
Why was it not ever put to community vote the way proposals work elsewhere? I'm not understanding why the community never had a voice in proposals.
I just said the same thing. I personally would have voted to bring in @world-travel-pro 's cousin who is a professional marketer for Disney than give it for shoes. I don't remember seeing any of these things even spoken about let alone offered for a vote.
Where were you sleeping for 2 years
Now you looking for everything, that happened or not happened from blurt foundation :/
Project is under development
but nabeel is already within the witness circle and I don't see anyone else getting any say over whether they think it's worth spending 30 k on shoes when @world-travel-pro was offering to bring in a genuine working marketer to be proposed. I personally do not like seeing only proposals passed without some kind of vote or show of interest from the community.
Has World Travel Pro written a proposal? I had asked him to write a proposal or ask his cousin to do so.
Don't forget to include me in your witnesslist
I'm not interested in voting you for a witness. If I was I would have after the first time you were telling me to. Please move on regarding your witness topic.