I strongly agree with a lot of what you say here, and particularly in the tenets of decentralization. I don't think I understand what you mean by overextended ourselves at the end, but I'm used to not understanding some things people smarter than me say =p

I am concerned about EIP and HF21, and discuss that from my viewpoint along with such facts as I have ascertained. While that's not unremitting boosterism, I don't think disagreement along those lines on those issues qualifies as complaining as much as it is seeking to influence the direction we take, and I have almost desperately sought to get my recommendations implemented.

My massive stake does indicate that I am not perceived as imparting great value here, but I measure value in other ways than financial, so I'm kind of ok with that. Not that I hate money, but it's not what I most love. This leads directly to the reputation system you mentioned, and I also agree strongly on that point. I am struck by the fact that we each grant repute to others in varying degrees, for myriad reasons, such that an account must be held in different reputation by each of us in reality. I have respect for your views, and if you held someone in high regard, I'd be likely to be interested in them, but wouldn't take your regard as able to be my own. Such variety would be necessary to a functional and forthright reputation metric, and would be useful to our community as a reflection of actual human values far more than the mere reflection of financial regard and time the extant reputation metric is. UA, while better, still doesn't reflect individual values and regard, leaving it also a little flawed.

Basically, a real reputation metric would have to be a slider that each of us would just choose where to set for each account we regarded. Just a thought I had I wanted to share with someone that could do something with it if they thought it useful

Thanks!