well it's not like that. I am aware that the original assumptions could have been like this. The problem is that I am also aware of how this system colud work.

Blurt, Steem or Hive are open source at least at their core, so you can basically do whatever you want with this software. That's the case. Build something new and testing it it's very expensive and here you have maybe not perfect but working system with years of testing. That's why is better to take this old broken system with some advantages and disadvantages and try to fix it rather that start from the beginning.

The problem with such dystopian talk that it's over, that something has been designed in one way or another, is bullshit. In its current form, it would be enough for a group of people to agree to make modifications, present them and obtain the support of the community, which is not difficult to achieve in a situation where others are passive. And you can now redefine with one HF how the entire system will work.

The problem is not with this blockchain, the problem is with what people have in their heads.

Taught by corporations and a work system based on receiving a ready-made, unmodifiable and licensed product. Through a work system based on employment (read: enslavement), they are taught to simply passively criticize the product, work or whatever they find, and to throw it away if they think it is spoiled. Instead, like all co-owners and entrepreneurs of all businesses in the world do (which is everyone on this blockchain), just get to work, act, try different things, fix what is broken and look for solutions to problems.

In my opinion, the DPOS system is designed for people who are mature enough to be independent and take responsibility for something in which they participate, and not for people with a consumerist and slave mentality, and this is a problem because, unfortunately, 90% of the population has instilled such a mentality today.

And this mentality is characterized by one simple thing: "give"

People want to get ready-made products and consume them and they don't care about anything else, and you see here on blurt you have 1,300 active people, EACH of them is really a co-owner and among them you have a dozen or so programmers, seo specialists, people who know people, artists, etc. . The problem is that even though they are the main "shareholders" of this venture and by acting together they work to their own advantage, instead they are mostly passive and reach out to milk the blurts.

Once, for example, we caught one of @fervi stealing from @blurtcreator. The guy bypassed security and turned on a bot that started creating accounts and then sending all the blurts you received at the start to one account ;] he created something around 30 accounts with 15 blurts each.

A guy who can do such things could, for example, create something useful for the platform and could even make money from it. It wouldn't even have to be related to blurt in such a way that if it collapsed, it would only lose something, like hive initiatives voting apps, etc. He would have received several hundred thousand for the proposal or, like me on the @khrom-proposals account, he collected it from an automated collection. I would vote for it myself. He would also certainly receive some commissions from the operation of his work - he would set them himself.

Additionally, if he helped develop the platform, his work in the long run would probably translate into an improvement in the blurt price and the number of users on the platform, and everyone would earn even more.

Instead, he preferred to use his skills to milk the system where he found a loophole and steal a measly 300 blurts. My hands are falling.

So do you see what I mean?

It's up to us what will happen here. If we wanted, in a year this system would be completely redefined and all its flaws would be fixed. The problem is that people prefer to complain and steal, instead of act and develop.

And when initiatives start fall apart then they complaining;]

Or like a @lucylin they complaining from beginning:P