My thoughts on Multisig -wallet #1 : One to keep an eye on.

For security and transparency reasons in the crypto space, many wallets have come to be from hot, cold, centralised to decentralized wallets. In the continuous search, we have landed in the Multi-sig wallet.

---

What are your thoughts on a multi-sig wallet and Steemit communities?

---

The muti-sig wallet is an innovation intended to prevent certain issues occurrence and this comes to the Steemit family as an innovation suggested by our dear @Ubongudofot and was executed by @pennif.witness. Before I give my thoughts about the Multi-sig wallet, let's know what it is all about.

Multi-sig wallet, known fully as a multi-signature wallet is a type of wallet in the cryptocurrency space that requires two or more private keys to execute certain tasks. This is likened to a multi-signatory account where the right to withdraw the resources doesn't belong to a single signatory or person.

This wallet was made to strengthen the security of the funds reserved in the wallet by requiring multiple signatories (parties) to sign off before executing any transactions.

Multi-sig wallet requires multiple signatures from a set of predetermined or registered addresses to carry out transactions. Hence, if any one of these predetermined or registered signatures is missing, the transaction will not be nullified. It is likened to a safe which requires unique keys belonging to separate individuals that must be used together to open it.

photo of keys - source;pexels

With all this explained, my thoughts on the use of a Multi-sig wallet for communities is a welcome development, hence I give my support 100% to this initiative. In times past, we keep experiencing where moderators and Administrators work hand-in-hand together to build a community but in the end, the Admin takes everyone and disappears, because the Admin is the sole signatory to the resources.

With Multi-sig wallets this could be reduced at least to a bearable minimum with no or fewer losers in the sharing of resources in the wallet if and when the community comes to an end.

---

Do you think it will be effective in a community?

---

I am sure it will, I believe this initiative would be extremely useful if it is adopted and utilised by the Steemit team for every community during the creation of the community.

A wallet that requires the personal keys of multiple signatories to carry out transactions, i.e. requiring at least two signatories to authorize a transaction can bring about transparency. This I believe will at least minimize the running away with community funds by a sole signatory.

But as I've given my honest opinion, I still have my doubts. This would be in the aspect of who becomes the signatories, in a community where the Admin appoints its moderators and the Moderators can leave a community at will, who gets to be the signatories?

Would there be an opening where the community gets to change the signatories? And if yes, who gets the responsibility to do so? And again, what happens when the two or three signatories to the wallet are brothers in arms, what happens to the rest of the community and the other moderators?

These and many more are my doubts that it will be efficient, but I believe when utilized effectively it can be the best for all community users.

---

Will you like your communities to adopt this initiative?

---

110%, I would like my communities to embrace the Multi-sig wallet initiative as this would facilitate trust and security among users and those who run the activities of the community (our dear moderators).

In addition to improved security of community resources, trust and multi-party participation, as there is no sole signatory, there are other benefits of using a multi-sig wallet such as Transparency among users-alike and the elimination of "Key-person risk".

Key person risk refers to when a community solely relies on a single individual to carry the responsibilities of all community transactions. This is a very common risk in the crypto space, an instance is where one individual has all the keys to a community account.

---

Who do you think should be among the signatories in each community and why?

---

Earlier, I asked this question, funny I am here to provide an answer to one of my questions. For me, the signatories should be users who are part of the community and platform growth with a reputable character, sincere and who is trustworthy.

photo of people wearing shirts spelled team - source;pexels

In the category of growth of the community comes the admin, a trustworthy person with a great reputation has to be among the Moderators but then, moderators do change the community or the admin evicts them for shortcomings so this is where the challenge lays, for the growth of the platform, I would suggest a neutral user from the Steemit team like SC1 or SC2. That way, the community resources can be put to good use.

---

What impact can this create on communities that adopt this initiative?

---

With the adoption of multi-sig wallets, users, contributors and the Steemit team will not have to be afraid of powering down and owning community resources by one person. This would even encourage those who carry out the day-to-day running of the community activities to give their best knowing it's a joint effort.

This would also bring about the longevity of communities and discourage people with ill intentions from creating communities. Having a neutral body such as a Steemit member in the governing of the community resources will discourage the cash and carry a policy of some community admins.

This will also encourage the growth of communities and the Steemit platform at large, not leaving out the users as a bigger community account means more curation rewards for users too. This would also encourage investors and the Steemit team to support communities without fear of cash and carry, leading to communities' growth in Steam Power, reputation and curation rewards.

I like to invite @starrchris, @yakspeace, and @ikwal

---

---

NOTE: Always have a smile on your face, as you are never fully dressed without one.