it seems to be a closed shop controlled by 20 or so people.
It can seem that way.
Also, if you look closely at the SPL proposal for example, you'll see (as of this writing) 813 in control. If you're using Peakd, on the proposals page, you can see the entire breakdown. All voters and HP levels. Just click where it says "Vote value 27,070,001.565HP" (as of this writing). It helps to scroll all the way down so it all loads properly.
27m HP. They still have plenty of incentive to increase that number, as their opposition dwindles.
Return proposal. 652 in control. Current HP slightly above 30 million. Much of that 27m HP probably won't be touching that return proposal, so that pile's out.
People powering down while being in support of SPL, acting like a, support leak. Someone has to fill that hole so more participants might step up. Meanwhile daily rewards roll in pushing the value up. So that's several more contributing, indirectly.
Not a closed shop. Wide open. Come join the party. They'll be advertising this shit for weeks and weeks to a sizeable community. Many are still unaware. More organic support incoming for sure.
Since day one, I have always been against this idea that the accounts with a low level of HP are worthless. Those individuals are not small. The dehumanizing nature of these words like minnow and whale. Pardon my language but that really fucks with peoples heads. They need to know they contributed to that 27m HP up there. Deserve the credit, as a group, regardless of HP level, equally. This is why you never see me subscribing to the idea those with high levels of HP call all the shots. I don't want people walking in here feeling small, by default, due to the culture. They call their shots, I call mine, you can call yours. It's all the same and adds up.
I will always sit here and show them they mean something. And I started with nothing. I've worn those shoes. Knew my own worth as a man and that HP number means nothing, since day one.
You've twisted my words and said I'm being disingenuous.
I took some flak a few months back for this:
https://inleo.io/threads/view/nonameslefttouse/re-leothreads-2ja2szhqx
64m HP at the time of writing shared between "dolphins" and "orcas". Plenty of potential participants there. Enough to push a proposal through.
Took some flak on the day that SPL proposal went live after suggesting, in so many words, Splinterlands try to pull this off organically.
It is, how can I put this gently... unfortunate someone there went around pulling strings and pushing buttons behind the scenes like that. Throwing a wrench in the works. Seeing no value in the actual community and instead trying to play chess with votes and people. Used the word "swayed" and somehow forgot the pendulum comes back.
I still think my suggestion is, a better idea.
It's fine if people disagree with me. A guy gets used to that after awhile.
Finally this place grows a pair and says enough is enough with posts like marky's here. I'm sure you've seen the show and I noticed you and I end up a lot of the same parties.
This looks bad, but it's good.
What else...
We can do better. It's possible. This whole DHF system is like trying to find order out of chaos but eventually all these falling apples turn themselves into a pie somehow like it's magic or some shit and it takes a fuck of a lot more than 20 people to do that.
Returned my vote to the return proposal once again, like hitting reset button since that's where it was before all this SPL shit started. Not touching it, like I said on day one. Moving on.
Sorry for wasting your time with this response. ;)
And no hard feelings, of course.
Ciao
Substantive statements aren't ever a waste of time - unless their recipient doesn't read them, but that's on the recipient, not the speaker.
Look. I agree 'it takes a fuck of a lot more than 20 people' to create functional society. That's the fundamental reason I detest plutocracy, both overt, as on Hive, and covert, as democracies. I know that myriad things have vastly more value to humans individually and severally than money. That fact is why it's so shocking to hear Mike Tyson saying that Don King would sell his momma for a dollar.
What magic you refer to in falling apples transforming into a pie is an apt description of the expectation of minnows and dolphins voting on DHF proposals mattering, when one whale vote outweighs the whole assembly of them. Apples falling turns into a mess that has to be cleaned up IRL. In the fall when I'm out hunting innawoods, I lurk abandoned apple orchards pioneers in the area planted when homesteading, because everything I hunt loves the apples. Black bears hoover up the fallen apples and shit them out hardly digested, leaving piles of what very much looks like apple pie filling - but is absolutely piles of shit.
Reality isn't what we wish it was. Wishing doesn't make it so. Systems designed to produce desirable results are what makes things so, what transforms apples into pie, instead of piles of shit.
That's why I propose above changing how the DHF is spent, so that only the relative portion of the fund to a Hive users stake is disbursed for proposals that user voted for and passed, while such portion of the DHF fund apportioned to non-voters for such proposal are not disbursed for proposals they do not vote for, and are available to be disbursed only on proposals that pass they do vote for. I believe that would encourage people to be more attentive to the functionality of proposals, to the accounting and returns detailed in proposals, because they'd not be able to vote to spend from the funds apportioned in the DHF to other users, but only funds apportioned to themselves that they would spend down by voting for proposals. Instead of just magically spending other people's money, they'd be spending their own (or it would feel like spending their own money, despite it not being anything they earned, created, or owned).
Prudence is fundamentally important to economic success, and that sense of responsibility I expect to be invoked by this means would cause most people to exercise more prudence in considering DHF proposals, which would require grant seekers to provide accounting details in their proposals. That may not change relative power between the substantively staked and those less so, but I reckon it would dramatically change the discussion by changing how people looked at the DHF funds.
A bientot.
View more