This statement has been co-authored by the Steem community, which includes witnesses, developers & stakeholders.
[IMAGE: https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmPjzgxJtDEf1xzqC8yW4zsBEdi7FzHrymS3dPiwyU6oUp/image.png]
Consensus witnesses are bound by our task to maintain the integrity of the Steem Blockchain.
Fellow Steemians,
With the recent purchase of Steemit Inc by the TRON Foundation, the Steem blockchain obtained a new major stakeholder. As another major player in the decentralized space, the TRON Foundation's interest in the Steem ecosystem has the potential to bring marketing power, resources and other potential benefits to both companies. It is thrilling to think of what will be discovered and shared with this introduction between our two vibrant blockchain communities.
While these opportunities are exciting, in these early stages the most important task for witnesses is to ensure the security of the Steem blockchain. To this end, we have updated to a temporary protective protocol to maintain the status quo currently established in regards to Steemit Inc's stake and it's intended usage. This update is reversible, and is simply to be used to ensure that the security and decentralization of the Steem blockchain remains intact.
Communication on the company acquisition is scattered and conflicting at this time, and we believe it is important to be proactive, rather than risk a possible security threat to the Steem blockchain. Since there are many new developments in the ecosystem, this is an ideal time to take a look at one of our long term impediments to decentralization with the involvement of the entire community, old and new. With this announcement, we're providing a detailed look at this soft fork update, why it was implemented, and how you can get involved as the voices of the Steem community.
What A Soft Fork Is, and What Soft Fork 0.22.2 Does:
A soft fork is a fully reversible code update, which is an excellent way for Steem consensus witnesses to deploy changes for the community to review and give feedback on, which may include changing their witness votes if they do not agree. What is especially important when considering a soft fork is to remember: it does not require any exchange to update their node, and all 0.22 versions running now will continue to operate. A soft fork does not mean that anyone running a backup witness will suddenly disable or necessarily miss blocks!
In general, Soft Fork 0.22.2 and transactions on the Steem blockchain will continue smoothly across the board for everyone with absolutely no change to a majority of the current Steem code. With the soft fork running, if any of the below clearly defined set of transactions happen (it is unlikely that they will), they will not be processed by the consensus witnesses. As there is more community feedback, and the Tron Foundation and Steemit Inc have a better chance to detail their roadmap and their plans for the future, this temporary soft fork can be adjusted to fit whichever direction the future holds for everyone.
Here are the Technical Details of Soft Fork 0.22.2 :
Relevant Accounts
- misterdelegation
- steem
- steemit
- steemit2
- steemitadmin
Excluded Operations
- account_witness_proxy_operation
- account_witness_vote_operation
- update_proposal_votes_operation
- vote_operation
- withdraw_vesting_operation
- set_withdraw_vesting_route_operation
- transfer_operation
- limit_order_create_operation
- limit_order_create2_operation
- transfer_to_vesting_operation
- transfer_to_savings_operation
- escrow_transfer_operation
The GitHub repos for comparison and consideration:
Files Changed:
Why Was This Soft Fork Deployed?
With the recent developments for Steemit Inc with the TRON Foundation acquisition, there have been a lot of uncertainties around the company and its continued use of the assets it controls, as well as plans for the future. This makes it an excellent time to return to a long standing situation that has had lasting repercussions for the Steem blockchain: Steemit Inc ninja-mined stake. In an ecosystem where we are moving towards true adoption for decentralized technologies, this large amount of stake, mined at the beginning of the blockchain with an "unfair" advantage, has always been problematic in terms of creating a potential for heavy centralization.
The Steemit Inc ninja-mined stake is a special case, as up to this point it has been clearly declared on many occasions as earmarked solely for the development of the Steem ecosystem, and to be non-voting in governance issues.
There has always been a good-faith trust by the community that this would remain the case into the future. This social contract was defined by Ned in the 2017 roadmap, and has been an important background factor for the Steem ecosystem for many years. With the changes in the company ownership, this is an excellent time to transition the good-faith agreement into a truly trustless one, utilizing blockchain code, and taking further steps to help Steemit Inc support even better decentralization and the development, onboarding, and expansion of the Steem blockchain.
For now, because there has not been a clear declaration from Steemit Inc on the use of this ninja-mined stake, Soft Fork 0.22.2 has been deployed to allow for the entire community to discuss how best to achieve the original goals that this ninja-mined stake exists to support.
This reversible soft fork will not process certain transactions related only to Steemit Inc ninja-mined stake as listed above, and is simply the due diligence required by consensus witnesses in regards to centralization that could have an impact on the integrity of the Steem blockchain. It is very likely that the soft fork code will not impact any transactions at all, and that there will be further announcements from witnesses, community members, Steemit Inc, and the TRON foundation in the near future.
Let's talk about the future of Steem!
We have a vibrant platform (with many front ends) which gives us all the ability to voice our concerns and excitement while discussing topics like this one in a public manner. We encourage you all to do so! No matter if you are a witness, a content creator, a business owner, or new community member — if you feel these actions are not representative of your vision for Steem, be sure to express that and vote for witnesses accordingly. As consensus witnesses were elected to represent you and to uphold the security and integrity of the Steem blockchain, we are here to support everyone in our ecosystem. Please get involved by voicing your thoughts, and using your votes.
All rewards from this post will be sent to @null.
Steem on!
The Steem Consensus Witnesses
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods
The ninja-mined stake might not fit accurately the "stolen goods" definition, but the point stands ... you can not transfer fraudulent items to another part and have the fraudulence magically disappear.
If the stake had a contractual obligation, that contract remains with the entity that was purchased, in this case SteemIt, Inc.
I am not a lawyer and I know you aren't a lawyer either so how about we leave the legal mumbo jumbo to the lawyers.
>All THE TOP 20 WITNESSES SHOULD STEP DOWN INDEFINITELY.
Then campaign to have them removed. Participate in the consensus protocol on Steem. Maybe you also failed to understand the network before you started using it. That is your fault, not the communities or the witnesses.
Also, come on @wattersblue, you have a 60 SP account (~$13). And you think your voice somehow should be able to influence those with hundreds of thousands invested in this blockchain?
Put your money where your mouth is. Get involved and make a project. UPDATE YOUR PROFILE PICTURE. Something, anything, before you try and act like you somehow speak for everyone.
> While the hearts may have been in the right place, the precedent set by this (Top 20 Witnesses ability to take anyone's stake away from them) will probably keep anyone from investing in steem ever again. Why should they?
I have spoken directly with investors that have purchased hundreds of thousands of dollars of STEEM and run their business on the blockchain. Have you? The ones I spoke to personally have said what the witnesses did is the reason why they are buying more STEEM. You don't have to take my word for it. You could get off your lazy ass and go find those "investors" that you are speaking for and get their actual opinions too.
Also, you are clearly a sock puppet account. If you can't even speak your opinions from your main account then your opinions clearly don't mean much to you. Why are you hiding?
@raj808 | Feb. 23, 2020, 11:22 p.m. | Votes: 4 | [
VOTE ]
> Relevant Accounts:
misterdelegation
steem
steemit
steemit2
steemitadmin
Excluded Operations:
account_witness_proxy_operation
account_witness_vote_operation
๐๐๐๐๐๐
[IMAGE: https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmYB4bYyGr7ezc1rJcZ8YREYEb41KX4qxnBooNfouheEZC/giphy%20(3).gif]
It was essential to prepare for and preempt any coup style witness voting from the stake acquired by Tron. Given the deafening silence from them on what they plan to do, I think this was the right decision!
I see some in the comments section talk about ownership, and how this decision goes against the spirit of decentralisation.
I'm gonna shout out for the people who gave this place the data that fuels its function. What about the fckn ownership of people's content, and their right to have a say in the platform they have chosen to place their thoughts, dreams and words on? What happens if someone who has had nothing to do with this blockchain's development simply votes in sock puppet witnesses to shift the whole direction of this place somewhere I don't want it to go? I have no option to destroy the content I've published here, so I'm pretty invested in keeping steem developing in a positive direction.
The question of ownership does not only apply to Justin Sun. But I guess my concerns over intellectual property don't count as I'm not a blockchain millionaire!
I truly hope that JS is looking to develop and market steem as a separate blockchain to Tron to grow the value of his stake, and maybe forge partnerships between dapps that are mutually beneficial to both ecosystems.
But we don't know anything at the moment, and silence is unsettling.
I fully support these measures, until a statement of intention and maybe a contract can be drawn up between Tron foundation and the community represented by consensus witnesses.
I'm hoping for a decentralised partnership between Tron and Steem, so that together both blockchain communities can become greater than the sum of their parts!
@raj808 | Feb. 24, 2020, 12:06 a.m. | Votes: 1 | [
VOTE ]
I was in the AMA and since then I've seen nothing other than Justin Sun's origonal tweet about how he wants all steem dapps to migrate to Tron, and a token swap.
> instead a bunch of vague mixed messages that seem to follow the theme of the initial announcement.
Fair point, but mixed signals are hardly reassuring. Granted he back tracked on the token swap idea in the dlive ama, but since then silence apart from an introduction on steem that said very little about his plans for steemit.inc. One of my worries now is that he's planning on ditching SMT's in favour of pushing Tron tokens as an option for communities, which would water down the potential value of steem tokens moving into the bull market. SMT's have the potential to catapult steem back into top ten market cap if they're successful coupled with communities, especially in a bull market.
While it's possible I've missed something somewhere, I do follow Tron foundation on twitter so would have thought I'd catch an update.
To be fair that tweet I mentioned was pretty damning from a content producers perspective. Especially someone like myself who has powered up 90% of their earnings over 2 and a half years and, until now, has had no interest in Tron.
Not to mention the fact that steem token is still worth 10x Trons value in dollars. I know that they've got a much bigger market cap etc but if steem tokens we're to be migrated to Tron in some type of swap airdrop tomorrow, I'm pretty sure we'd all lose value while Tron airdrop recipients got a windfall of free money.
It's these types of concern that make me feel this extreme softfork is necessary, coupled with JS history in regards to voting with his stake in governance issues on Tron.
> IMO, if someone doesn't like the way the witnesses chosen by stakeholders do their job, then the best recourse is to vote in new ones, and if you don't like DPoS where stakeholders choose witnesses, choose another blockchain.
Vote in new ones, I don't know how current and up to date http://www.steemreports.com/witnesses/ is, but if It is current and up to date, blocktrades is now the nuber one voter and can cast 10454 votes, where as all accounts that have voted and can cast less than 35 votes is 3,572 votes. (that is for the first witness on the list which is gtg, so I am skeptical of the accuracy since I did see another tool that showed Roland as the numeber one witness). Small accounts like mine make no difference in a vote and that is why we use proxies to bolster our collective vote power.
I do just love how when people point issues out with certain aspects, or pass on their thoughts if it is wrong thought in the minds of some the typical response is if you don't like go somewhere else.
I like the steem block chain. I perceive a problem with the way down votes work, and with the way the witness vote system works. So your IMO is more relevant than mine, that is fine you have invested money, after seeing this issue do you think any other large investors are going to be willing to risk having their funds tied up and crippled.
There were rumors of a sale before the official announcement, if there was such a concern over the ninja mined stake being sold then this action should have been taken at that time. The witness have had four years to do this, they did not.
Just my honest opinion of how I see it, but if you want everyone to be an echo box of your opinion, I would suggest that you find a place where people are not allowed to voice their opinion such as you tube and face book. Just as you suggested I find another block chain.
@smooth | Feb. 25, 2020, 4:58 a.m. | Votes: 0 | [
VOTE ]
> Did he not pay for the Steem Power that he purchased?
I have no idea the terms of any deal which may have happened between Justin, Ned, and Steemit. The rumor is that Justin bought Steemit, the company, and not the stake directly, so I fail to see how a change in the shareholder list would make any difference. The company is not the blockchain and the blockchain is not the company.
Apart from that, as many others have said, a change of ownership even of the stake doesn't change anything. Could Justin sell everything back to Ned, and Ned would then be off the hook for any statements that he ever made pre-sale ("That was Old Ned, I'm New Ned, please don't try to hold me accountable for anything that Old Ned said"). This is absurd in my view.
> And regarding the "consensus-breaking block" its irrelevant... are you trying to say that people can buy Steem but not too much so that the witnesses keep their control? Bad message
That is hypothetial. It is much more difficult to buy a controlling stake on the open market. That is one of the premises behind any proof-of-stake system: that buying up enough stake to break consensus is extremely expensive and unlikely. If that turns out to be false we will have to face the fact that proof-of-stake (including DPoS) is a lot weaker than we thought and may not be able to be trusted. But again, that is hypothetical. Buying up a huge block of ninja-mined/premined/etc. stake that was described as non-voting is not hypothetical.
> aren't all the witnesses aware of many "ninja-mined" stakes that are out there?
I'm not aware of anyone other than Steemit who manipulated the mining to guarantee the outcome they wanted (effectively an 80% premine) by withholding information, posting broken mining instructions, resetting the chain when it didn't go their way, making public statements about how the ninja-mined stake was not going to vote on witnesses and earmarked to develop the ecosystem, etc. No one else did that. Steemit did. The situation is unique, and you can't wash away that history by selling a company.
Also, I'm not a witness, just a stakeholder like you, and I am voting to support the witnesses who are running the update. Your logic in trying to convince me to change my mind is seriously wanting, but you are free to vote your way and the votes will decide it. I'm not even sure what is the point of all this noise when we have voting. Don't like what the witnesses are doing? Vote them out!
This seems great to me.
But. When will witnesses realize that they must be "workers" and not direct beneficiaries of the content, nor the soul of Steemit?
More than anything because it should be assumed that the more participatory people, the more benefit to the Witnesses? If not. We have a big problem
Personally, I'm interested in these things ... Even if it's just out of curiosity. And I don't mind seeing it, even reading it. But.. if my partner, for example, reads this.
He runs out of Steemit and never returns..
Isn't it time we started ordering strictly technical publications about Steemit? And not make these contents monopolize the platform completely?
What happens if a Witness community is used? For example ... and maybe so.
Can we start trying to sort the contents of the platform ...?
Does anyone see Facebook or Twitter passing their Trello boards through the social network? Well, surely, this is how maybe some Steemit users feel..
Because Steemit always eats himself? Isn't it time to get out of the shell? and try to make Steemit something more professional, focused on external users.
I do not know. It is only a thought.
Try to make Steemit something more professional, focused on external users.
A more serious platform. More NATURAL in its use. In your participation.
I do not know. It is just a thought.
It is really necessary that "curators" invade the cover, labels and now also the new communities.
Seriously? Still having changes.
Will anyone start using Steemit with a healthy conscience ..? Nobody is going to try to change their attitude of seizing the platform, instead of trying to create a nice platform that attracts more users?
Seriously? This is told by someone who has been watching Steemit from the shadow for two years.
If there aren't many people inside Steemit who start considering certain attitudes.
Or we take advantage of the situation and we all start looking at our belly button and serious changes begin to be made. About the publications and the way of publishing.
Or it is absolutely impossible for this project to grow, no matter how much the future can contribute. Or @justinsunsteemit Or tron. O Jesus Christ.
While the people who control most of the publications and those who earn the most money are the witnesses themselves, while the communities are controlled by the witnesses themselves. While each Witness continues to focus the labels as he pleases.
So. It will be impossible to move forward.
Now more complicated. If each community is going to take its users to publish within their own community ...
To continue segregating more and more instead of unifying ... So that the contents can be fed back.
Steemit's path. It is being a cat eating its own tail. Forever?
It seems. Because if the platform tries to make changes, but its users use those changes for their own benefit, instead of the benefit of the platform itself.
It is impossible to evolve.