Well I do not know what you believe, but no "amendments" will do any good IMHO. Steem is simply started/staying on a wrong fundamentals.
- You cannot have decentralization if you start by giving 85% of the shares/votes to yourself.
- You cannot have "the new the free social media platform" if you start by having you and 50-75 of your friends "distribute" it to the masses. (And btw by distribute the founders have shown everyone this means "sell for money".)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
All I would say is that the powers who are usurping the system might be happier with half the power and four times the steem value ... and rising!
Actually I believe the powers that will eventually bring the "new and improved social media" will have negligible stake in it (per Steem standards)...maybe 0.5%-2%, maybe less. And they will be getting happy/exited not by the price of their token, but by the numbers of people who come and use/enjoy the platform they have build. Do not get me wrong, they will get very very reach by their holdings, but they will simply not rush to sell in the first 6 mo at any price they could get, much unlike the current "founders".
And there we agree! Too many millennials getting overly excited at the technology without understanding how a business derives 'value'. 400 names currently hold 90% of the steem - hardly a 'value proposition' or valuable situation.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit