RE: Hive Witnessing and DHF: A Vote of No Confidence?
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Disensus is a democracy issue as you said, but I think the problem of failed projects does not come from burocratic processes, on the opposite, the problem is precisely that there are not controls approving and tracking projects on the blockchain, which causes too many failed projects because anything could sound good but without a proper metodology everything will fail. What Hive needs is a higher formalization and a greater level of proffesionalism, because this way every cunning child that arrives to the chain with a "cool idea" will receive support indiscriminately. It slowly ruins the blockchain, projects are not managed by simple faith, managing projects has a metodology and a tracking process precisely to reach specific objectives in a certain period of time, with a clear return for investors, in this case, for the Hive blockchain. Do you think that any company finances any project just because it sounds good? No bro, they ask for a proper planification, budget and schedule, and in most cases financers ask for a prototipe or a performance metric of the project, this means that people looking for financing their projects must start over zero with their own inversions, alone by their own. Hive must be managed as a business, and inversions should be evaluated to have success.
Unfortunately it's even more complex than you think. The projects that failed didn't just have solid planning and didn't plan for sustainability. Even Leofinance and splinterlands that are the most successful actually have their flaws, but for now, they're still standing strong. To have a proposal approved, I think you need to even have some form of longevity on the chain, and contrary to what you've said, people who have cool ideas don't get approved, unless it's been proven that they actually know what they are doing.
However, governance, decentralized governance is just harder.
Then, the situation is even worst than what I thought.