[공지] @proxy.token 증인 투표 운영 방침(@proxy.token witness voting policy)

netuoso (70) · 5 years ago (edited)

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

Yes. Shortest should be 7 days in my opinion.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

Downvotes should be able to be removed from communities with SMTs. Not from the main chain. There's a compromise to be had there.

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

Yes. Would you support a dev proposal for such work?

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

Potentially. I don't know what you mean by this but increasing revenue for users is a good thing to me.

$8.61

mahdiyari (67) · 5 years ago (edited)

@sct @proxy.token

With much respect to the Korean community,
I agree with these terms too.

When there is a community, we can discuss anything together.
But we can't negotiate when Justin Sun controls everything. He will do whatever he wants.

I hope you stay with the community.

$0.17

lukestokes (75) · 5 years ago

Same answers for me as well.

I understand downvotes create a lot of concern for many users on the platform, and I have had friends leave the platform due to what they thought was unfair downvoting. I think solving this via community moderators may end up being a great way to prevent this abuse while still providing away to ensure the rewards pool is protected and used for valuable content instead of bots or accounts trying to extract it without providing value.

I would like to know more about what types of smart contract functionality you are interested in.

I'm also curious to know more about the paid subscription model might look like, who would benefit from it and more. Maybe a community with a built in registration and subscription fee?

$0.05

bobinson (63) · 5 years ago (edited)

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

Good option as the trouble of locking funds indefinitely can be addressed. May need to change or investigate the post payouts economics to decide the exact number of days IMHO.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

Agree to @netuoso

Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain?

Absolutely and the options explored by DanL should be investigated. There were discussions regarding Smart Contracts in the past. There was some work using a programming language called WREN also was done. Refer : https://steemit.com/blockchain/@dantheman/a-better-approach-to-turing-complete-smart-contracts

Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?

More details will be needed. That being said, attempts to make the chain self-sustainable without coin sales like what was going on will be great. There should be sustainable mechanisms to create revenue. Any reasonable means to achieve is welcome.

$0.00

therealwolf (75) · 5 years ago (edited)

I agree with this comment and it is my stance as witness as well.

$0.00

haikubot (54) · 5 years ago

I agree with this
Comment and it is my stance
As witness as well.

^{- therealwolf}

^{^{I'm a bot. I detect haiku.}}

$0.00

lemouth (72) · 5 years ago

I am also in agreement with everything said above.

$0.00

themarkymark (78) · 5 years ago (edited)

$0.00

howo (70) · 5 years ago

$0.00

drakos (70) · 5 years ago (edited)

(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

A few days power down is too short and opens the door for vote abuse on rewards: vote, powerdown, powerup/delegate to another account, revote. This is unacceptable. The minimum should be >7 days (past the reward payout). Also, short powerdowns allow hackers/phishers to steal funds very fast before account recovery is processed. The power down has been extensively discussed and I'm in favor of a 4 week period, it's a good compromise especially for security reasons.

(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

The downvotes were designed to prevent abuse, otherwise it would be a wild west for circle jerking and reward milking. However as mentioned by @netuoso, with the upcoming SMT's you can control downvotes and exclude bad users are you please.

(Are you willing to introduce smart contract into the STEEM block chain? )

Sure, why not, adding technology to the STEEM blockchain is always welcomed. It may require a lot of development (look at SMT's... we're still waiting for them after 3 years of promises).

(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

You can have your own model right now without any additional blockchain development. By creating accounts for users yourself and giving the private posting and active keys to your subscribers, while retaining the master password and owner key. After the subscription expires, you change the password, which will consequently change all the private keys. If the user renews subscription, you give them the new posting/active key. And finally, with communities, you can grant the users access to them or not. The current system is very flexible as you can see, and readily allows a custom tailored subscription model.

I hope I answered all your concerns. I'm witness @drakos and your vote would be appreciated, especially in this troubled time. Thank you.

$7.53

9 votes

muscara (67) · 5 years ago

Interesting idea re paid subscription model - it already works. So why not use it.

$0.00

drakos (70) · 5 years ago

And it's easy to implement in any web app.

$0.00

mcfarhat (70) · 5 years ago

Hey @sct, @proxy.token team.
It seems you already moved in a direction with the new tron imposed witnesses without giving time to chat to the old community selected witnesses.

To clarify to you the situation a bit further, we are at a stance that could make or break the steem blockchain. There are clearly malicious actions taking place from tron side to overtake the steem blockchain which started in coordination with exchanges as well, with the real intent is to simply move steemit as a dapp to tron and without any real plans for steem as a blockchain. This jeopardizes the existance of the blockchain itself.
This is why our community and witnesses and pushing to ensure the blockchain is controlled by the community, not a single entity imposing tron's intentions, which is at the core of how decentralized systems are intended to function.
In terms of your questions, and while we cannot respond on behalf of the community or the witnesses, yet we can at least confirn our vision altogether to grow and improve the blockchain in itself, including SMTs(smart contracts) and creating further growth roadmaps.
The time now is to work on ensuring the survival of steem blockchain and creating a better community-induced growth to it.
In the worst case, and should you still believe that the whole community stands differently than the way you perceive things, and as we believe you would intend for the whole ecosystem to grow, and if you sense you are undecided as to how to proceed, i would suggest removing your current votes so as not to tilt the balance to any side.

$6.72

14 votes

sct.biz (55) · 5 years ago

Thanks for your comments.

we had a long discussion with steem members including witnesses and cleared key issues few hours ago. You may find it has done what you wished.

$0.00

lemouth (72) · 5 years ago

Thanks for the positive reaction and discussions.

$0.00

mcfarhat (70) · 5 years ago

Thank you, indeed very appreciative of this, i was joining/chatting intermittently to the team on discord due to being on the road.
Looking forward for further collaboration to grow Steem further, all together.

$0.00

arcange (73) · 5 years ago (edited)

$4.30

9 votes

glory7 (80) · 5 years ago

What do you mean by removing upvote policy as well? Does that mean we do not have any voting for steem level? If it were the case, how do we distribute rewards?

$0.00

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

It means no STEEM reward pool, but SMTs only.

The STEEM "rewards" would only then be from witnesses and from inflation in our SP. Currently, we all gain 2.x% for having SP.

$0.00

glory7 (80) · 5 years ago

I see. Interesting idea.

Thank you for the info!

$0.00

arcange (73) · 5 years ago (edited)

$0.00

fervi (66) · 5 years ago

$0.00

mindtrap (74) · 5 years ago (edited)

If they are going to act the same way Binance , Poloniex and Huobi did, they better not list Steem at all...

fervi (66) · 5 years ago (edited)

$0.00

mindtrap (74) · 5 years ago (edited)

The implementation of the soft fork (which is reversible) went through AFTER he announced his “token swap” plan, as a defense till things are crystal clear.

Do you even realize that most likely you would be holding TRX now instead of STEEM?

$0.05

fervi (66) · 5 years ago

$0.00

mindtrap (74) · 5 years ago

Do you even know what Tron network is? A casino. That’s what it is. Do you really think that those thousands of users that are against him and his methods wanna hurt Steem or their investments?

I quit trying...you obviously don’t understand

$0.12

fervi (66) · 5 years ago

$0.00

Show 3 more replies

markkujantunen (74) · 5 years ago

Wrong. Justin Sun did it by publicly announcing he was going to dismantle the blockchain. He said he was going to destroy it. I still believe he meant it.

$0.00

fervi (66) · 5 years ago (edited)

$0.00

markkujantunen (74) · 5 years ago (edited)

And yet there are people who liked these changes.

How many people liked the idea of the chain being destroyed?

Maybe there should finally be some debate? Unless there's always a "master" ruling the "plebs" and it's not worth talking about.

Look, if Steem were to be dismantled and the code ported to the Tron blockchain as a set of smart contracts, then none of use would have any power over anything. Because the Tron foundation has complete control over Tron blockchain, we'd be at the complete mercy of Justin Sun. That if anything is master ruling over plebs if anything. Is that what you really want? Because that's what you get if you stab the community in the back by voting for Justin Sun who is trying to turn Steem into a centralized network.

$0.00

fervi (66) · 5 years ago

$0.00

Show 5 more replies

arcange (73) · 5 years ago (edited)

$0.00

fervi (66) · 5 years ago

It's possible. But the situation is like a plane crash. The fixes are only after people die.

$0.00

abit (70) · 5 years ago

Thanks for the questions.

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

While shorter power-down period adds flexibility to investors so that they can get out sooner when needed, on the other hand, it adds uncertainty to decision making E.G. SPS voting thus may impact development.

IMO the system should find a balance to attract both short-term and long-term investors. Perhaps we could have 2 types of SP, one type is short-term which is for daily activities E.G. posting and post voting, the other is long-term which is for decision making E.G. witness and SPS voting.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

"Gaming the reward pool" has always been a concern, that's why the down-voting feature is there. IMO down-voting should cost the voter something, because "stake talks". For example, my @adm account has been "donated" to @steemcleaners to fight bad contents since the very beginning of Steem, at my own cost.

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

Introducing smart contract is generally a good idea. However, there might be technical issues involved. On the other hand, although there are a few blockchains with smart contracts doing well, there are also quite some blockchains support smart contracts but nobody use them. The competition is hot. So, I'd say, if we have the resources (developers, funds and etc) and we can afford to lose the competition, we can do it. The key is to find our niche.

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

I'm not sure what does this mean. It seems a business on top of the chain to me, but not something to be built into the consensus. Generally we welcome all legit businesses.

$3.93

7 votes

steemcleaners (83) · 5 years ago

We have always been very grateful for all the support that you have given us. It's an immense help to Steemcleaners' members for their hard work. Some work full time for Steemcleaners spending between 15-20 hours per week.

$0.72

8 votes

mobbs (69) · 5 years ago

IMO the system should find a balance to attract both short-term and long-term investors.

Can this not be resolved with the upcoming SMTs? People can design their power-downs however they see fit, no?

I would like Steem, as the backbone of it all, to ultimately be incredibly robust and stable in which people can't just P&D, hack & steal, and so forth.

Well anyway, I do think 13 weeks seems weirdly arbitrary and lengthy, but 1 month seems totally reasonable to me

$0.00

julian2013 (73) · 5 years ago

支持两种类型的sp

$0.00

roelandp (74) · 5 years ago

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

I am open to discussions to lower it further (mind you the powerdown had changed from 2 years to 13 weeks) however I want to prevent too much "fast food voting" where investors come & go and just move to steem for some botvoting for a week and move out again. I'd consider that raping the reward pool and destructive to the community.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

If used for its intended reasons it is a great way to curate or anti-curate content. If abused it is an annoyance. Removing down-voting alltogether might fix a lot of drama's :)

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

I am not certain the Steem chain is really optimized for executing smart contracts. Curious what you are thinking of and/or missing specifically.

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가? (Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

Again, I'm curious to learn more about this. If it's about unlocking encrypted content only to those paying... Interesting and could be a nice business model!

With regards,
@roelandp
루 란 피 드림

$3.83

gtg (70) · 5 years ago

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가?

I'm not negating shortening power down period, but there are serious security implications (as you can see in current case - exchanges were willing to abuse funds just because they were promised to PowerDown fast). Such "light" stake should be restricted when it comes to impact on governance.
One of many potential solutions was presented some time ago by Steemit Inc., but recent events caused their leading blockchain developer to resign.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가?

Votes whether up and down are integral part of Steem, i.e. e-Steem-ation of content via so called proof of brain (but sometimes lack of there of). I'm happy to see SMTs that combined with communities can figure out their own reward distribution models that would include no downvotes if a given community desires so.

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가?

Steem itself isn't designed for smart contract, but it's possible to use similar solution to a middle-ground blockchain for compiled code and smart contracts that one of our witnesses developed to enable it for BitShares users.

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가?

I don't know what you mean by that but I beleive that's something UI based that's up to service providers. Steem transactions are free.

Please note that the witnesses are not really someone who make decisions. Witnesses are servants of the platform providing security and reliability to serives, like in every DPoS system there are stake holders who vote accordingly to their desired way of how Steem should look like.

These days there's also Steem.DAO that can be used to vote for desired changes and implementations and their funding.

Thank you for voting responsibly and at least not allowing centralized entity to override governance of the platform.

$3.42

7 votes

nonameslefttouse (74) · 5 years ago

Have there been any conversations about providing token holders incentives to use the savings account? Higher interest rates, perhaps? I feel it would be wise to keep Steem Power the way it is, including the 13 week powerdown period. But I also realize some want incentives to hold the token PLUS cash out quickly, so I think the ideal solution is to allow savings to grow faster, but not be as profitable as holding Steem Power.

$0.00

gtg (70) · 5 years ago

Savings had the sole purpose of security feature in case of hacking, but there were talks for SBD APR being applied only to balance in savings.

$0.00

nonameslefttouse (74) · 5 years ago

Providing more options for investors, in my opinion, is far more beneficial than constantly tweaking things that work just fine.

$0.00

mindtrap (74) · 5 years ago (edited)

Despite our differences you guys are also Steem stakeholders. Some of you big ones.

Aren’t you concerned that your investment might go down the toilet? Just look at Justin’s methods...

He only cares about his personal growth. Not you not me and definitely not Steem.

If you are uncertain of what you should do simply do nothing. There might not be Steem at all after this vote of yours...

Reconsider

$1.03

cervantes (77) · 5 years ago

To the korean community:

First of all, thanks for having upvoted the necessary amount of top witnesses to protect the chain against being controlled by one single entity. That was a honourable step.

Second we would like to comment on your opinion requests:

(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

I have my serious doubts about shortening the power down period to less than 4 weeks. The problem I mainly see is that a too short period will give custodians accounts - such as exchanges - the possibility to power-up customer stake to inference in the blockchain governance. Today we are protected by the fact that powering-up the stake will effectively lock the customers liquid stake which could derive in the possibility for them to perform withdrawals on request. Imagine what would happened if you go to your bank to cash out some money and they deny your paynment due to liquidity shortage. Even worse, the bank tells you that they have invested your stake in a long-term investment fond.
At the same time,I agree that 13 weeks could be too long for a sort-to-mid term investors type and it could force them to his invested stake liquid loosing the paid interest rate distribute among SP holders to compensate inflation.

(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

I in-fact see the need of the actual downvoting policy and I will not willing to remove it until we find a way to ensure or support content discoverability. As you know, we are a content oriented social network. The economic incenivation should be done in a way that the network rewards "good" content better than bad or abusive content, Of course, content curation is subjectve measurement but we need a way to signalice likes as well as dislikes. Might be it will be usefull to have other kind of not that negative user interface, since a just a dislike (downvote) is not representative enough. Sometimes you agree that a post would be not worth more than, han 10 dolars. If the potential reward at the time of voting is 20 dolars, the curator will press the "downvoting". The autor would than get the impression than the curator does not like his post at all, but in reallity, he likes it, just not "that much". Perhaps a change in the UI to signalice that you are willing to value it at 10% and the sistem performs the vote/downvote automatically depending on your tarhet value.

(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

I think to introduce smart-contracts capabiities into STEEM blockchain will result into more costly and unpredictable operations. Thd good thing about steem that it does not too many things - only social operations - but these are quick and cheap and much more escalable for a muldi dapp blockchain.

(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)
Im not sure what you are referring with this question, perhaps I need to dig more in details to get your exact requirements. With my first understanding I would suspect that a subscription model is anyway something to be managed at client level and not at blockchain level.

And at least, sorry for my bad english. As you might know, im a proud spanish native speaker.

$1.02

moeknows (60) · 5 years ago

Cervantes, can you write a witness post so that I can resteem it on my blog?

My Spanish is bad, but I'll try:

¿Puedes escribir un post en el blockchain describiendo porque la gente debería votar para ti? Yo quierdo a resteem tu post.

$0.00

pharesim (74) · 5 years ago

Okay, I'm happy to use this opportunity. Not only because of the current situation, but because I think there have been a lot of misunderstandings with me, @curangel and its team the last months.

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

I personally like the longer power down, because it prevents me to take emotional decisions. I'm sure it is a big reason why I'm still interested in this community after 4 years. I also understand that other characters might prefer to get liquid sooner.
As other witnesses said, <7 days is difficult due to double-voting concerns. But 7 days+ for the voting stake is absolutely no issue. I would prefer when stake used for witness and SPS voting needs longer to unstake, to prove a long term commitment with these important decisions.
I am not trying to enforce my own opinion on everyone though, so if a decision between two technically sound solutions has to be made I generally try to take up as much community feedback as possible and act accordingly.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

Definitely for communities and their SMT when they choose so.
For STEEM, I deem it very important to have a countermeasure to excessive self voting. If that didn't exist, I would have to self vote myself all the time, and could not use all my stake to support as many small users as possible just for the curation rewards.

Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain?

Smart contract platforms do currently have scaling and other issues. But if a good solution to the problems which became emergent on all these platforms, which had to fight with chain congestions and even halts, is found, this would absolutely be a worthwhile addition. Requires time and funding though, something as complex as that can not be rushed.

Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?

Yes, either in the ways already described by for example drakos, or even better an implementation that automatically burns a percentage of the subscription fee.

I really appreciate these clearly formulated questions, and welcome anyone who wants to approach me with more to meet me on discord, write me an email or comment on a post of mine. I have always tried to be accessible to all parts of the community and especially to the non-english ones, and hope we can all find ways for better communication in the future.

I have a request too: If anyone can connect me with a curator who is interested in searching for exceptional but undervalued content in languages curangel doesn't cover enough yet, please do so! I have made several attempts especially for Korean, but unfortunately did not receive replies so far.

$0.36

stoodkev (69) · 5 years ago (edited)

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

At most 7 days. Less than 7 days means you can Power Down Power Up and vote within the time of payout of a post, that has many security issues coming with it.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

I agree with @arcange, I d agree to remove both upvotes and downvotes at Steem level and move it SMTs built on top of communities.

Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain?

Steem already works via smart contracts, do you mean the possibility to add custom ones to the blockchain? Sure.

Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?

You mean at the blockchain level? That can already be done at application level with encryption and a paywall. But yea, why not.

$0.30

6 votes

aggroed (78) · 5 years ago

Powerdown is a great conversation. I think we have to make it faster for investors and people only interested in post rewards, but we have to keep it slow for actual chain governance. It's bad for the chain to let people who only want to turn a very short profit to be able to take control of how the chain operates and have no stake in it's long term existence.

I currently think the best way to accomplish this is to treat steem in savings account like a SP delegation back to the account owner. So, If I @aggroed move 50k liquid steem into savings the blockchain also treats that like a 50k Sp delegation to @aggroed.

Majority of chain stake supports downvotes for steem and choices for SMTs. When we make it through this all commmunities can choose to have an SMT without downvotes.

Every smart contract chain ends up at the same place. it can't transact. Human creativity >> 1 set of servers. The best option is to limit smart contracts through layer 2 solutions and not make them entirely open. Splinterlands and steem-engine both show how you can get all the features of smart contracts with steem without forcing all computing through one set of servers. Smart contracts can also be ignored. Cryptokitties can just stop putting gen 0 on their website.

4 subsription. On the Splinterlands market we charge 5% and give it back to tournaments. We did this to give some incentive to 3rd party apps to form. Something similar could be done with steemit.com.

$0.24

6 votes

ecoinstar (63) · 5 years ago

I like the creative use of the savings account, elegant implementation for a non-governance, faster powerdown.

I am still not convinced by additional free downvotes, we always had downvotes, they just cost VP.

With a consensus steem-engine, it would be harder to claim steem can't do smart contracts. Thank you for pushing so hard on layer 2, so steem blockchain can aim for LTS!

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 5 years ago

SP 파워다운 기간을 3일~7일로 단축할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

Yes, 7 due to prevent stake from double voting on content within the 7 day window. I would also like to see users have the option to stake for longer though (if they choose) to allow for greater security if they would prefer to have their funds locked up for longer. For users who want to power down quickly, they could choose 7.

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

I support individual SMTs being able to choose whether or not to allow downvoted for their SMT.

스팀 블록체인에 스마트 컨트랙트를 도입할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

Sure, if it is properly implemented and tested.

유료 구독 모델을 도입할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

It sure how this could be accomplished on chain, but I am open to the idea.

$0.19

revo (60) · 5 years ago

I would also like to see users have the option to stake for longer though (if they choose) to allow for greater security if they would prefer to have their funds locked up for longer.

Someone, forgotten who, suggested those who stake longer get more mvests (or the equivalent). Staking is good for the community and chain, so why not reward those who stake longer with better access to rewards and voting influence?

$0.14

timcliff (73) · 5 years ago

Yes, exactly. Harder to code, but other than that it seems like a good idea for sure!

$0.00

flauwy (73) · 5 years ago

I hope we can come together as a community with this. As you hopefully know, we are coming together daily currently on the MSP Discord server and discuss in long town hall meetings how to deal with this situation.

If you vote for the Justin Sun/Tron witnesses, you basically vote for centralization. If the Korean community wasn't heard enough before, than you are welcome to join the discussion and actually be part of what is happening.

$0.07

dmitrydao (67) · 5 years ago

It's great to see that we started a conversation with Korean community. I know you have thousands of people behind proxy.token and we have to respect their opinion as well. Each culture has its own differences and sometimes it's hard to find a good compromise that will suit everyone.

We do need to work together to make sure that the chain is not centralized, censorship-resistant and always up-to-date with new features that all of the users want and need.

With regards to the questions, on behalf of my witness at least I should say the following:

The power-down period can and should be shortened. But due to technical and security concerns, it should be at least 7 days. That is something everyone agreed upon.
I was never a fan downvotes, I've never used them and have no plans to do so. I think it is something that prevents freedom of speech.
Smart Contracts can be implemented by I'm not sure if there's a need for that. Steem works perfectly as it is right now, and that's one of the reasons we have so many apps built on Steem. In general, there's a proposals system that people can use to build smart contracts on top of Steem blockchain itself, so I think it's possible.
Subscription or revenue model is a must for every business to stay alive, as long as it doesn't prevent the free usage if Steem blockchain itself. We can have business models on top of what we already have. Otherwise, this has to be decided by the majority of witnesses like always.

$0.06

sct.biz (55) · 5 years ago

Hi dmitrydao.

Nice to see you here again after steem fest.

Thanks for your opinion and believe that steem ecosystem will be better and better for all communities since long discussion with Korean community and key people including witness group today.
I feel ecosystem has been improving since long communication between key members from communities last night.

$0.03

dmitrydao (67) · 5 years ago

Hope for the best. I think whatever is happening right now is a huge test on how strong our community really is. Thanks for supporting several key witnesses by the way, it was a very important move to keep the chain safe.

$0.00

will-richards (47) · 5 years ago

거래소는 투표를 위해 고객 자금을 훔쳤습니다. 그들은 당신을 더 빨리 속이고 싶어합니다. 도둑을 숨길 수 있습니다.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.06

dalz (68) · 5 years ago (edited)

You should leave the status quo with 4 community witnesses.

Also this looks like blackmail. Quite unethical.

aschatria (61) · 5 years ago

Screw ethic, he's a maggot, he doesn't need that.

$0.00

bluengel (76) · 5 years ago

참고로 themarkymark 증인 반대합니다~!
다운보팅과 글로벌블랙리스트 사익을 위해 운영
온갖 더러운 짓 다 하는~!

블루엔젤 포스팅 참조하시면 반대 사유 있습니다~!

Posted using Partiko Android

gomdory (66) · 5 years ago

곰돌이가 @bluengel님의 소중한 댓글에 시세변동을 감안하여 $0.005을 보팅해서 $0.037을 지켜드리고 가요. 곰돌이가 지금까지 총 7528번 $99.227을 보팅해서 $101.858을 구했습니다. @gomdory 곰도뤼~

$0.00

thecryptodrive (70) · 5 years ago

Hi thanks for your post, I hereby confirm my stance as follows:

(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

I am willing to shorten to 4 weeks as per the steemproposal I made, this gives a healthy balance to security and funds availability as well as prevents mass dumping on the market. You supported this proposal if you recall, but you never voted my witness when you decided to vote for a couple, I was very surprised and disheartened that you didn't because I was fighting for the very same lower powerdown times that you wanted and voted for.

Not right now, this is a massive change and there are no steemit devs left to code it, I do believe the free downvote pool is unfair and leads to downvote abuse, it also makes it a double deduction for example if you upvote something else you move rewards away from everything else, but by downvoting a particular post and upvoting something else at the same time, that post is extra penalised. Downvoting is needed to stop abuse otherwise the reward pool could be drained my malicious parties, but I don't believe in the free downvote pool. My business is heavily affected by it and I actually commented on your last post that I understand how it feels to be downvoted because I recently suffered the same, you didn't respond to me.
Smart contracts, yes! I agree that if we had smartcontracts we could do some fancy pegging of SBD to become more of an algo token like DAI, also SMT's without smart contracts are less appealing than other tokens on EOS, ETH or TRON that have that option if needed. If SMT's are going to compete with other chains then smart contracts should be added.

In the end none of this can be achieved with the current state of Steem, ex Steemit devs refuse to work for Justin and the only way is to get them back and get paid directly by the DAO they won't come back and build as long as the centralised witnesses are in place, and the longer we leave it the quicker we will lose them to other outside job opportunities.

$0.03

quochuy (72) · 5 years ago

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

Yes, but 7 days is too short 6 - 4 weeks sounds more reasonable.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

To be negotiated and planned. Other witnesses suggestions are interesting but there might be other aspects to be thought of.

Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM blockchain?

Yes, I'm supporting this idea as I believe it will add value to the chain by giving more opportunities to developers.

Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?

Yes, if you are thinking allowing the chain to become a kind of decentralised Patreon. Content could be stored on the chain but access is restricted. Developing this on-chain instead of in dApp is an initial investment that can save time and money from projects owners who can then focus their effort on their product rather than the technical aspect of implementing the subscription model.

$0.02

deniskj (63) · 5 years ago (edited)

Frankly, I understand where the animosity is coming from when it comes to the SCT community. The newsteem mantra brought about a coordinated downvote effort by large Steem holders that targeted various Condenser communities. I won't mention them because they know themselves.

I was always against the free downvote pool and witnesses must admit to the part they played in that and offer a way forward that puts authors first. People first.

We already know Justin Sun will not do that. He admitted that all he wants is to pump and dump.

What would happen in a 1-3 power down window if Justin Sun dumped all his 65 Million Steem in the Market? Steem would be worthless.

Whether proxy.token vote is legit backing of Sun or a protest vote, the end is the same. The Steem Blockchain will die and your investment will have no value.

SCT community, become part of the solution. Your voice is louder than ever. Back the original Witnesses.

$0.00

gerber (63) · 5 years ago

lets just break price feed for few weeks XD.

(The Steemit acquired by Tron reveals its future plans in an open letter.)

Wondering who will code stuff for Justin and how long it will take :)

$0.00

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

I guess people will figure out the finer details?

$0.00

crokkon (68) · 5 years ago (edited)

$0.00

4 votes

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

It should be pretty obvious by this point that this post is about this:

$0.00

aschatria (61) · 5 years ago

Blackmailing maggot, that is.

$0.00

dragosroua (74) · 5 years ago

(Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )

Minimum is 7 days, anything below this would add too much instability.

(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )

I wrote more than 3 years ago a proposal to mitigate this: https://steemit.com/steemit/@dragosroua/yavap-yet-another-voting-algorithm-proposal-or-what-i-actually-understand-by-proof-o-stake

(Are you willing to introduce smart contact into the STEEM block chain? )

Yes

(Are you willing to introduce a paid subscription model?)

Yes

$0.00

oldstone.sct (60) · 5 years ago

유료구독모델은 여기서 다룰 문제는 아닌 듯합니다.

$0.00

jeffjagoe (72) · 5 years ago

it's an absolute shame to see the @sct / South Korean community side with the destruction of STEEM

$0.00

markkujantunen (74) · 5 years ago

Agreed.

$0.00

dr-frankenstein (67) · 5 years ago (edited)

@sct I just hope you can see through the layers of hypocrisy and BS and make sure that the right things are done before spreading your support.

Funny, now everyone is giving a shit about the Korean community. Several witnesses and people here made racist jokes about them a day or two ago, now this? The change is unbelievably transcendent.

A lesson to learn.

$0.00

melinda010100 (73) · 5 years ago

I'm confused. The Korean Community is willing to kill Steem so that they can have bid bots back?

$0.00

aschatria (61) · 5 years ago

Obviously they're just the short-term leeches, we should fork and exile them. This garbage of a behavior says enough.

$0.00

melinda010100 (73) · 5 years ago

I don't think that is the solution. They appear to be listening and changing their votes.

$0.00

aschatria (61) · 5 years ago

Good. They see a benefit being a part of the community than support a dictator.

$0.00

martie7 (62) · 5 years ago

Nothing bad in short-thinking. Everyone has right buy, earn and sell any crypto when he wants.

$0.00

aschatria (61) · 5 years ago

It is a stake based model not a tipping jar.
If you want to leverage a very good tipping system try Memocash or ReadCash, those are systems that work like that. I am on both, very good so far, highly recommended.

$0.00

gadrian (66) · 5 years ago

On your first point, the vote on SPS proposals FOR and AGAINST the reduction of the powerdown period from 13 weeks to 4 weeks (not under a week!) was split relatively 50-50%.

You are asking for a less than a week power down period. And I see many conceded to 7 days.

Maybe that will be well received by many. But it will also have a large opposition. See the vote split above!

Just saying...

$0.00

twinpapa (80) · 5 years ago

이것 좀 확인 부탁 드려요.아무것도 들어오질 않아서요.물어 볼 곳이 없어서 여기에 작성했어요.

TRANSACTION

1. 1. 오후 5:47:00

Transaction ID:
065c9120f6f842345a4e55f9c523cb14c961d609

Sidechain Block: 5674175

From: @twinpapa
To: @sctm.burn

Amount: - 23 SCTM

$0.00

happyberrysboy (83) · 5 years ago

넵 처리해드리겠습니다.

$0.00

twinpapa (80) · 5 years ago

감사합니다~^^

$0.00

udezee (67) · 5 years ago

It will be unfair to the reward pool to shorten power down period from 13 weeks to 3 or 7 days, this will cause some serious disequilibrium to the payout window which is capped at 7 days. If you want the PD period shorten then payout window will also be shorten and steeming will lose it's purpose.

Also I know a witness adding value to the chain, whom runs a decentralized banking service. This will hinder such service that has being a life saver to the community in dire times.

Other requests looks negotiable.

$0.00

glory7 (80) · 5 years ago

증인들이 이거 대답해줄지 의문이군요... 지금 골든타임이 지나가는듯.

$0.00

dhimmel (65) · 5 years ago

@ glory7, 나는 항상 Splinterlands에서 당신과 싸우는 것을 즐깁니다. 그러나 나는 꼭두각시 인형 증인에 대한 투표가 큰 실수라고 걱정하고 있습니다. 목격자로부터 단기간에 양보를받을 수 있지만 전체 네트워크가 손실 될 위험이 있습니다.

Steem 커뮤니티는 일반적인 위협에 대해 이전과는 다른 방식으로 통합되었습니다. 지금 우리는 우리의 공통된 근거를 우리의 차이점이 아니라 사용해야합니다.

@glory7, I always enjoy battling you in Splinterlands. But I am worried voting for the sock-puppet witnesses is a major mistake. You may get a few short-term concessions from witnesses, but at the risk of losing the entire network.

The Steem community has united like never before against a common threat. This is a time we should use our common ground not our differences.

$0.00

glory7 (80) · 5 years ago

thank you for the reply. I have voted for other witnesses as well.

I am having conversation with other people including witnesses, and for now proxy.token has agreed on putting several non-tron witnesses to prevent hard-fork so that we earn time to discuss.

$0.23

dhimmel (65) · 5 years ago

Great I think that is a smart move. Having the Tron witnesses possess a super-majority threatens the decentralization of the network. Were Tron to hardfork to immediately return the vested exchange tokens that would amount to a permanent tarnish on the neutrality of the blockchain. And they'd likely introduce unforeseen issues into the codebase. So I agree it's essential Tron witnesses don't gain a super-majority while the community decides on the best path forward.

$0.00

happyberrysboy (83) · 5 years ago

저스틴에게 투표 했더니 의견이 달리기 시작합니다.

$0.00

glory7 (80) · 5 years ago

역시... 힘을 보여줘야 대화가 되는듯. 특히 상대가 저럴수록.

$0.00

ammonite (67) · 5 years ago

These are conversations to be had but at the moment your vote is for centralisation or decentralisation. You decide.

$0.00

aschatria (61) · 5 years ago

You are not only supporting the dictatorship with your reluctant opportunistic behavior, but you are trying to convey an open blackmail to an entire community - I thought that JustinE CunT is a rock bottom, now I see I was wrong - if karma gets her grabby hands on your mortal flash you will be the rain worm for the rest of eternity. Good luck with this shit, you will really need it.

$0.00

bil.prag (68) · 5 years ago

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period?

less than 7 days will from what i understand not work on the steem blockchain. 7 could maybe work.

$0.00

jacobpeacock (66) · 5 years ago

@proxy.token I wonder about the correlation between Kucoin, you amd the Korean community. Look at this announcement. There is a media push on Twitter as of this morning promoting Kucoin. https://twitter.com/kucoincom/status/1235186537085583361?s=20

$0.00

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

KuCoin is based in Hong Kong I think.

$0.00

jacobpeacock (66) · 5 years ago

Interesting.

$0.00

steemitcuration (67) · 5 years ago

The things people will agree to, to get a vote you could have done all of the above previously but didnt now to save your own asses your agreeing to anything.
@proxy.token ask these lot to suck you off and watch a que form

$0.00

naha (78) · 5 years ago

당장,,, 다운보팅 없애는 것만 얻어내도 큰 성과일 것 같습니다.

$0.00

arcange (73) · 5 years ago (edited)

$0.00

epscu (65) · 5 years ago (edited)

투표한번한다고 변경 못하는거 아니지 않나요? 선조치 후생각...

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.00

torrey.blog (57) · 5 years ago

Please help retain at least 4 community witnesses to prevent sock puppets from holding a supermajority.

$0.00

new-jersey (75) · 5 years ago (edited)

파워다운기간 단축을 위해서 져스틴계정으로 투표를!! 거기에 스마트컨트랙까지~

$0.00

marki99 (54) · 5 years ago (edited)

What do you mean by paid subscription?

Pay a subscription to get a Steem account?

Also, did you consider that removing downvotes from Steem will allow bidbots to come back?

$0.00

knight4sky (69) · 5 years ago

저스틴하고 직접 컨택을 해서 제안하는게 더 나아 보입니다.
밥팅들 대답 기다리느니...

$0.00

tanlikming (65) · 5 years ago

i agree the article what you said.

$0.00

hyokhyok (77) · 5 years ago

30투표->1투표 변화 는 없네요 ㅎㅎ 이것도 얼른 되어야 담합을 막을수있을것같습니다

$0.00

abitcoinskeptic (73) · 5 years ago (edited)

Posing this as a question to witnesses is a good start to open discussion.

Please summarize opinions and make dpoll for stake based voting not witness proxy.

Most witness votes right now are not accurate of true support.

Also to be fair there should be an open question

[OTHERS]

$0.00

yehey (63) · 5 years ago

$0.00

justinsunsteemit (57) · 5 years ago

$0.00

blacklux (67) · 5 years ago

Powerdown can't be shorten to 3 days when the post payout is 7 days, that will bring serious issues. 7 days is the minimum but I agree with many witnesses with the 4 weeks period.

Downvotes are needed to control spam, that's why they were implemented. For years we had a serious spam/bidbot problem that was strangling all the hardworking people trying to get their content to be seen. Downvotes cleaned the place of all that and its helping to control abuse, giving everyone a fair opportunity to have their stuff seen and voted.

If making money is what brings you here then you have to consider those two.

$0.13

lordbutterfly (70) · 5 years ago (edited)

Are you willing to shorten the SP power-down period to three to seven days from current period? )
Yes! three Days

Korean community, if you allow for this you destroy the blockchain. All your tokens value will possibly go to 0. JUSTIN SAID HE WANTS TO SELL RIGHT AWAY. HE WILL DUMP ALL HIS STEEM ON YOU AND YOULL BE THE ONLY ONES LEFT ON THE STEEM BLOCKCHAIN IF YOU ALLOW THIS.

This is only so he can return the funds to his friends Binance and Huobi that used customer funds to take over the blockchain in an unprecedented malicious attack and so he can EXIT fast.

Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain?

Without downvoting Steem will be filled with SPAM and bots will once again rule the trending page. Do you really want that???

Nobody (including me and witnesses) can freeze anyone's assets. Everyone assets should be safe!

Yes they can absolutely freeze your assets and instead of it being the choice of the community stake it will be the choice of one guy.
Your assets are NOT safe. The whole blockchain runs on one server in China. He can do to all your funds what ever he wants and you will never have a say in anything just like Tronians have no say on TRON.

If you wanted a dictator im sure you would have moved to North Korea. Dont vote in one here.

$0.08

raycoms (70) · 5 years ago (edited)

Funny how easy you are able to make these decisions.

Do you know anything about the economic model of Steem and how it was before free downvoting was introduced?
You yourself abused your downvoting power to silence people in the community that commented on your posts. Seems a bit counter intuitive don't you think?
Do you know anything about the game-theory and security implications that come with reducing power-down to three days?
Edit:
Who will code this for you? All your steem blockchain devs just left the company and iff, would probably only accept to be funded by the community through the SPS.

$0.07

penderis (63) · 5 years ago (edited)

Do you even have a clue, I wonder those changes you implement will probably sink Steem value quicker than you selling all your stake in one go. Not to mention it is not sustainable or realistic in the least. You may be smart but you are acting very stupid.

Before agreeing to such things it needs to be researched and the effects considered not just used as a bargaining tool.

$0.06

4 votes

abitcoinskeptic (73) · 5 years ago

스팀 블록체인의 다운보팅을 제거할 의향이 있는가?
(Are you willing to remove down-voting policy of STEEM blockchain? )
~~Yes!~~
Never!
have one on the house @justinsunsteemit

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

Are you just saying yes to appease to the Korean community? Lol

$0.00

cryptopie (81) · 5 years ago

Do not do that @justinsunsteemit

$0.00

tcpolymath (68) · 5 years ago

Hi Justin,

Please do not listen to the other responses to this comment regarding downvotes. Spam was well-controlled on Steem before Hard Fork 21 through Steemit delegations to spam-reducing initiatives like @steemcleaners and @mackbot who had well-defined rules for downvoting. (And I hope you will continue those delegations.)

Independent downvoting introduced in HF21 has primarily allowed users to define "abuse" based on however they feel at that particular moment, and has led to an environment of uncertainty and conflict. Users who just want to post and earn no longer have any confidence in whether they will be redefined as abuse at any given moment, and this has driven away thousands of legitimate users and drastically reduced the amount of worthwhile content produced for Steem. Despite this the users in favor of downvoting continue to believe they are somehow making Steem better; they are not.

$0.00

wesphilbin (61) · 5 years ago

@tcpolymath,

Well said... I don't wish to be flamed... and as (hopefully) everyone knows, I am doing my best to spread positive energy on our Blockchain. But the down voting has done exactly what you said...

Users who just want to post and earn no longer have any confidence in whether they will be redefined as abuse at any given moment, and this has driven away thousands of legitimate users and drastically reduced the amount of worthwhile content produced for Steem.

Community... each of us helping each other. Thats what defines us... thanks for stating it like it is...

$0.00

bobskibob (60) · 5 years ago

The reason you are just saying yes and not elaborating shows the lack of understanding of everything you just said yes to

$0.00