RE: Over 33% of ALL Staked HIVE Needs to Vote a DHF Proposal Right Now to Pass
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
There are a few things that most people somehow "don't see" or "don't want to see"...
The Ecency proposal is funded, which is a showcase that it is possible to be funded... Is the return proposal too high or too low is subjective, it's also subjective which of those two would centralize HIVE more...
The regular excuse is that people are dormant and don't vote on proposals... It is partly true, but again, Ecency is funded... I do check proposals and I know that probably the majority of whales and orcas do the same... As there is no "against" button, people who disagree don't vote... But, I could bet that they have seen proposals... This means that they DO CARE, but don't want to support it...
It is interesting that the model without downvotes on proposals was chosen at the beginning, firstly because Blocktrades knew it from a different project and it was easier to adapt it to the legacy chain, and secondly because it was thought that downvotes will lead to internal fights.
I think that the "NO" vote works very well on Splinterlands and it could work well for DHF too... Btw. that's the other thing... People take it too personally when you don't vote for the proposal... It's not just a YES or NO question, as there are many things that we do or don't like... Maybe the amount is too high, lack of transparency, don't have a clear goal, no impact, or in the end, no trust in the proposal, etc.
We are going in circles over and over again... We would like decentralization but with OUR rules, and to have control over someone else... That will not work...
Yes, I actually noticed even before the sudden increase to the RP threshold how MANY votes Ecency and even PeakD proposals had. That must say something, with all the promotion of the proposal going on. I think one thing that enough of the big stakeholders are bothered about by comparison is open source versus closed source, when the latter isn't generally funded by the DHF. It's true, in this case, we are talking about marketing, not development that should be funded. Another factor to consider is that sometimes votes are cast based on personal chemistry, which may exist or not. It's not the best thing to do, but understandable...
It hasn't crossed my mind that any significant stakeholder still active on Hive hasn't noticed the Inleo proposal. It would have been difficult, since they have been trying to convince people to vote on it one by one. It was definitely a choice either to not vote (as a way to vote against it) or to not vote as a way to not get involved. By the way... How do we know who has what opinion in this case?
I also think there are some legitimate debates about hitting previous targets, but they have probably been doing much better than the other marketing fund that got almost immediate support every quarter.
I'm waiting to see what other projects get funded besides Ecency, and who will get them passed the threshold. Then, we can talk about control and centralization.