I beg to differ, when stinc have hidden accounts it equals hidden agendas, and when those accounts were created before on boarding people, and when those accounts mined most if not all of the coins, as stated by dan, and when those accounts are cashing out, making the most profit from bidbots, have never made any positive impact on the whole system, then her question is more valid than your comment! Heads in sand never made the world any better.
Your point is well taken, @shepz1. Although good sources have assured me who it is, it has tantalized my curiousity to know who @freedom is definitively.
@themarkymark's recent work on exposing account ownerships had me overlooking his opinion on vote bots and giving him my renewed support for witness.
Yet we all knew, or could have found out, what the stakes were (excuse the pun) before our involvement in the steem blockchain. We all knew, or could have known, that even the minimal 1/19th going to miners was repealed and that even before it was it was a closed club or only extremely gifted software engineers that could figure out how to do it. That was not by chance in my estimation.
The world is not a fair place, but it is times like now that help to level the playing fields. If many more reward seekers jump ship we should be able to run our witness nodes on a 64 GB machine with a noip.com domain address, regardless if Steemit, Inc. gets around to the rocksDB implementation HF. If STEEM drops to one cent then we can become whales to challange even the likes of Steemit, Inc.
But hopefully it need not come to that and hopefully those with the biggest stake have the greatest motivation to see this project work and have success.
But do we have the right to demand anonymity be removed? Not by my way of thinking and it is exactly such governance that keeps me from investing in EOS.
Anyway, that's just how this one user sees things.
But do we have the right to demand anonymity be removed?
It is not demanding anonymity removed from all, more Ned and his alt egos coming clean.
It is clear by now either way that he is no longer needed here. Nothing happens with him hanging around, just excuses or silence.
The only part of this is that surprises me, is that he even bothered to answer paulag, as he does not even bother answering top witnesses.
SMT is mostly all anyone hears from ned.
I am hoping the same as you, that the whole thing gets simplified so it can be run on those 64gb machines, and a 1 cent buy in would be excellent for new people to balance this place out to where in my opinion it needs to be.
We all want this place to succeed or we would not be here, I hope it succeeds though without neds greed.
I beg to differ, when stinc have hidden accounts it equals hidden agendas, and when those accounts were created before on boarding people, and when those accounts mined most if not all of the coins, as stated by dan, and when those accounts are cashing out, making the most profit from bidbots, have never made any positive impact on the whole system, then her question is more valid than your comment! Heads in sand never made the world any better.
Your point is well taken, @shepz1. Although good sources have assured me who it is, it has tantalized my curiousity to know who @freedom is definitively.
@themarkymark's recent work on exposing account ownerships had me overlooking his opinion on vote bots and giving him my renewed support for witness.
Yet we all knew, or could have found out, what the stakes were (excuse the pun) before our involvement in the steem blockchain. We all knew, or could have known, that even the minimal 1/19th going to miners was repealed and that even before it was it was a closed club or only extremely gifted software engineers that could figure out how to do it. That was not by chance in my estimation.
The world is not a fair place, but it is times like now that help to level the playing fields. If many more reward seekers jump ship we should be able to run our witness nodes on a 64 GB machine with a noip.com domain address, regardless if Steemit, Inc. gets around to the rocksDB implementation HF. If STEEM drops to one cent then we can become whales to challange even the likes of Steemit, Inc.
But hopefully it need not come to that and hopefully those with the biggest stake have the greatest motivation to see this project work and have success.
But do we have the right to demand anonymity be removed? Not by my way of thinking and it is exactly such governance that keeps me from investing in EOS.
Anyway, that's just how this one user sees things.
Thanks for a superb reply.
It is not demanding anonymity removed from all, more Ned and his alt egos coming clean.
It is clear by now either way that he is no longer needed here. Nothing happens with him hanging around, just excuses or silence.
The only part of this is that surprises me, is that he even bothered to answer paulag, as he does not even bother answering top witnesses.
SMT is mostly all anyone hears from ned.
I am hoping the same as you, that the whole thing gets simplified so it can be run on those 64gb machines, and a 1 cent buy in would be excellent for new people to balance this place out to where in my opinion it needs to be.
We all want this place to succeed or we would not be here, I hope it succeeds though without neds greed.
You certainly have made me hear "the sound of silence" with regards to this issue. Thanks for the discussion!
Most welcome, cheers my friend.