In Response,
Governance is a mechanism and methodology using decision science, to derive the best possible outcomes. All of which following "governance" in your original story is marketing. Altcoins generally fail because founders lack real financial knowledge and engineering. Most are kids or young adults whom learned a bit of code and decided, to clone a gitcoin and cloners always clone mistakes. One must first accept this as a fact before decrying something other is wrong with an Altcoin.
Further, one can't expect finances, to rally against the dollar when there was never a finance specialist nor finance engineer involved in the first place. Sort of like opening a bank having neither accountants, bookkeepers or nor chartered financial specialists as staffing personnel. It's irresponsibility and unaccountability topped with immaturity that, eventually crashes an Altcoin.
Litecoin is a perfect example. A cryptocurrency built of the same code as Bitcoin and challenges Bitcoin, as some sort of split personality. However, understand issues with Litecoin; my take versus their take. Litecoin declares problem with the Altcoin is it lacks global usage and acceptance. My take is Litecoin has global usage so, the statement is senseless. I had asked the organization in whole about having seen no member of the parent organization who was a financial engineer nor financial specialist. I had been forwarded, to the aforementioned problem with the Altcoin. Essentially, the organization is operating Litecoin having neither a working CFO, finance engineer nor finance specialist. So why should this cryptocurrency succeed as I would question any financial organization of the same? It makes no sense!
Therefore, all those hopes and dreams boils down to commencing real business within the parent parent organization with other organizations. It is not, the responsibility of end-users, to ensure an Altcoin function and with popularity, rather it's a matter of the parent group undertaking accountability and responsibility for the Altcoin created.
Thank you,
MFAS
@sphap-steemit
By governance I mean that the blockchain has to have some kind of defined process how to make decisions. If there is no governance process, the result is usually chaos and nothing gets done. You can see this in the case of Bitcoin today: it can't make a decision how to scale. Blocks are full and nothing is done to make situation better because the community can't agree on the next steps.
A well-designed blockchain has a clear process how to make any kind of decision regarding its existence and function. The decisions might be sometimes bad, but at least it can make them.
A good governance process also makes sure that the blockchain can exists for a long time. If the original developers, or "parent group" as you say, are taking all the accountability and responsibility, the system can collapse when any of them leaves. A properly designed decentralized system shouldn't be depended on certain individuals, it should be able to replace anybody easily.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit