RE: My response to Justin
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
For me, while I can understand where you are coming from the quote,
" You (Justin Sun) paid money for Steem, and believe that because you paid for it that it's your property to do as you see fit",
is exactly how I view his stake.
I think its largely unreasonable to expect the man to spend stake to support the projects of the blockchain. Would it be awesome if he decided to on his own, hell yeah it would. I don't see any obligation for him to do so.
Are the ones asking him to hand over his funds willing to do the same with their own funds?
In the past Ned's Steemit Inc. decided to use their funds to support the blockchain but that doesn't mean that same responsibility will be taken on by the new owner of Steemit Inc and its stake.
I think there's a large group being very unreasonable in this situation. I don't see any exit scams. I see a man who sold his stake to a business man. Its the idea that Ned's tokens (now Justin Sun tokens) weren't his own that's incorrect and what is causing allot to have an incorrect view of the situation.
Unless someone can show me some sort of legal document that shows proof the STEEMIT INC. Ninja Mined stake wasn't privately owned the above is how I view the man's stake.
Anyone in their right mind would do what they could to secure their investment worth millions and that is what Justin Sun tried to do after yous soft forked him. While I don't like nor do I agree with how he tried to take the power of his stake back (used exchanges), I fully expected him to fight back for the stake he rightfully owns and purchased with his own funds.
Simple public statements from witnesses stating that they wouldn't re-do the softfork would go a long way to de-escalate this thing. I don't want to see these long political posts that don't answer the question Justin asked in his latest blog.
I agree, that would be a step in the right direction.
The exchanges, which colluded with Mr. Sun in fraud to their users, demonstrated clearly that in the cryptoverse possession is ten tenths of the law.
@null|Mr. Sun
Yes, after using it for 4 years to
milkbilk us into investing.The very definition of exit scam, IMO.
I think is more acurate to say, after he helped the chain with his own stake for 4 years he decided to move on and sell his shares to someone else who may take a different approach with the privately attained stake.
Well, yeah, except for those empty promises that are now proven lies.
Well, yeah, except for
Those empty promises that
Are now proven lies.
- freebornangel
I'm a bot. I detect haiku.
"Promises" ...... promises that Justin Sun didn't make.
Like I said, I get where some of these responses are coming from but the fact is if its not legally binding then there isn't much ground to stand on for forking a mans stake who used his own funds to purchase said stake.
He's been free to transfer it, power it down, or burn for several days.
That doesn't excuse the fact it got soft forked.
Do you expect him to just trust those who soft forked it to not do it again?
It would be foolish of him to do so. He likely needs some sort of insurance that gntds. his stake won't be forked again. A public notice from those who did like @tamiil suggested would be a nice step in the right direction.
Once he starts an operation it takes a hard fork to stop/reverse it.
He is, and has been for days, free to do as he pleases with his funds.
The sf was used to get dialog, it has served its purpose.
No guarantees in crypto outside the code.
This is why becoming known as a liar tends to precede folks with the reputation of lying.
I call B.S. on that .....
The man is rich and has other investments to tend to. It was only days between the "A.M.A." and the secret metting between 65(?) steemians who thought it was a good idea to implement a soft fork on an man with a vast amount of resources and funds. The softfork was a foolish idea that got all this mess started.
The coming in like a wrecking ball with token swaps and ending the chain, then voting with nonvoting stake in tron, got this started.
Then doubling down with exchange stake just proved the assumptions right.
The witness done right by us.
We won by inches.
Regardless, done is done.
We only want to move ahead, now.
When smteees!, and tranquility?
The token swap is a none issue. Anyone can offer a token swap, its up to the community to accept it. What happened on the tron blockchain has no affect on the STEEM blockchain. We can't point to that as justification to freeze the mans stake he paid millions for.
I don't like how he tried to regain his tokens power (the exchanges should of never got envolved) but I don't fault the man for protecting his millions that he just invested.
In short: No softfork / No need for exchanges to get envolved. The softfork started all this but like you said, lets look forward not backward.
!ENGAGE 25
Can somebody get JS to swing the big stick on some legacy bullies?
Maybe not proactively, but certainly reactively.
@freebornangel you have received
25 ENGAGEfrom @rentmoney!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
There are several video recordings of them acknowledging that the stake was intended to be non-voting and spent on development. Making that statement does hold legal obligations.
And you can't buy a stolen car and expect to keep it after the police come to your door. Justin Sun may not have known about the obligations put on the stake, but those obligations were made by the CEO and CTO of Steemit Inc., which means that Steemit Inc., which is the actual holder of the stake continues obligated to fulfill the statements.
DISCLAIMER
Steemit Inc. (The “Company”), is a private company that helps develop the open-source software that powers steemit.com, including steemd. The Company may own various digital assets, including, without limitation, quantities of cryptocurrencies such as STEEM. These assets are the sole property of the Company. Further, the Company’s mission, vision, goals, statements, actions, and core values do not constitute a contract, commitment, obligation, or other duty to any person, company or cryptocurrency network user and are subject to change at any time.
Source: https://steemitwallet.com/about.html
Outlining and speaking about what their then current plans were doesn't mean plans don't change.
To date I have seen 0 legal proof the Steemit Stake wasn't privately owned. Your comment hasn't changed that fact.
But was that disclaimer done after the fact or before? Ned has been recorded in interviews talking about the purpose of the stake, and that disclaimer seems like a direct response to public opinion regarding previous statements made on the stake.
To be honest I'm not sure. I know if I was a witnesses I would be doing a number of things to garner support.
(1) I would search out and provide any legal proof the Steemit Stake isn't private.
(2) I would compile all promises made by NED in regards to the Steemit INC. stake
(3) I would find adequate proof that the disclaimer is after the fact of this issue at hand.
(4) I would provide all the above in a single post and referance it everytime a topic like this comes up.
Its the legal aspect that truely matters here, not promises that aren't legaly binding. If there isn't enough legal proof the Steemit INC. stake isn't privately owned then its privately owned regardless of if promises were made or not. Its the job of those saying Ned's Steemit stake isn't private to provide evidance to support those claims.
Wrong. Ned had his own [substantial] personal stake held in his own personal account(s). So did Dan. But the STEEM held in Steemit accounts was something else entirely. It was meant to develop the ecosystem, and much of the community participated with that in mind. Many people bought stake, powered up, and invested their time with that understanding. I personally powered up more STEEM after this understanding was reaffirmed by Ned late last year. Otherwise I was prepared to dump. The Steemit stake is CLEARLY encumbered with an obligation to the community.
Having said that, I believe there is room for a compromise that would ensure Steem has the decentralization and development funding it needs going forward, while still enabling Justin to make a huge return on investment.
Not wrong .... Its Ned's business where he holds his personal stake. Many others here have their stake in multiple accounts as well. There's only one type of stake in this situation ....... that's Ned's (now Justin Sun's) personal stake.
As I said in my opening statement. I think there's a large group of people being unreasonable due to the false narative that the Steemit INC. stake isn't privately owned. If you have a legal document stating otherwise I'll gladly reconsider my position on the issue.
Justin Sun shouldn't be stronged armed to spend his stake on the development of the chain. It should be his choice to do so or not just like its your choice to spend yours on the chain or not.
Are the ones asking him to hand over his funds willing to do the same with their own funds? If not they shouldn't be demanding someone else does.
The Steemit Stake is encumbered by social contract. Maybe you don't know the history. Briefly:
From an early stage, the community was understandably concerned about Steemit's large, ninja-mined stake and many were reluctant to invest their resources in the platform. In order to mitigate concerns and attract maximum participation by new and existing users/stakeholders, Ned assured the community that the Steemit stake would be used only for development purposes and would be diluted over time for greater decentralization. He repeated this many times in many public venues, and it came to be considered a social contract between Steemit and the community.
Many (if not the the vast majority) of Steem ecosystem participants factored this social contract into their decisions about whether to buy and power up STEEM (and how much), whether to invest their valuable time blogging/commenting/curating, whether to run witnesses, develop dApps, etc. Many would not have engaged in these activities without the social contract. It is clear that the stake Justin Sun now controls as a result of purchasing Steemit Inc is encumbered by this social contract.
The bottom line is that Ned has put both Justin Sun and the community in a very difficult position. Unless, of course, Justin knew these details. Either way, the only way out will be some kind of compromise. That's what civilized people do when their strongly-held positions are at odds. What do you propose instead, a fight to the death?
This gave me a chuckle. I touched on my opinion on everything else you wrote already in my various comments so I will just address your line above.
I purpose a rework of how witnesses are voted in. I always said 30 votes was too much ..... With less votes per account Justin Sun or anyone with a significant amount of power wouldn't be able to over take the top witness spots. With less votes, Steemians will have to be more picky about who they think deserves a witness vote. The witnesses would also have to work harder to attain a vote due to votes being less plentiful, which in turn will help better the chain.
Edit: Here's a decent system that's allot better then the current...
https://steemit.com/steem/@holoz0r/changing-the-witness-voting-system-by-introducing-witness-downvotes-could-this-work
I feel Ned is the one that fucked us including Justin and believe that Justin really had no idea what he purchased.
Yes, I would like to believe that too, but it seems naïve, for a multi billionaire.
Yeah you would think he would of had one of his employees look into all the details before spending millions on something.
He let Ned talk him into jumping off a cliff, iyam.
I would say, uh, maybe?))
Lol, we seem to be winning, for now.
When smteees! and tranquillity?
The SMT development was unfortunately somewhat botched in my view. Too much scope taken on in one bite for the amount of resources available (meaning the resources available after Ned pocketed most of the money and left development running on scraps) and the quality is not quite there. Hopefully (independently of current drama) we can get to where it can be deployed and the block chain does not explode, but I don't know when.
Wonderful.
I think we got time, provided this witness drama blows over.
The chain looks near complete, to me.
At least for the bloggers, gamers will never have enough.
He has trouble holding onto employees :
https://www.coindesk.com/former-employees-sue-justin-sun-and-tron-foundation-alleging-workplace-hostilities
I judge people by their actions. I've done a thorough enough analysis of the top Tron dapps to conclude that they're basically all gambling, and full of tricks (just like Justin himself). Regardless of who owns what, in my opinion this Justin Sun characters is a shady dude who I wouldn't want to sit down at the dinner table with (even if Warren Buffet were there too -- Buffet is also shady anyway). Regardless of who owns what, who tricked who, etc. my magical power of intuition just tells me to run in the opposite direction of this Just Sun character. I don't care it Steem goes up to a ZILLION dollars under his reign. All business is ultimately personal relationships, and Justin Sun has shown me (very clearly, through his actions) that he is someone I DO NOT want to associate myself with in any way - plain and simple. NFor me, there's no need to overanalyze. Ned is an a-hole for subjecting (me - I'll speak for myself only) to Justin Sun, and Justin Sun is a shady character who I want nothing to do with. My Steem value is being reallocated into DEC (Splinterlands) where I feel COMFORTABLE having it.
Now that was pretty darn easy.
Well they did get sold out and the mayority of the dev team seems to have gone away, more of a regular acquisition (which usually suck) dyt?
Meh, rich people problems.
As long as my payouts don't get interrupted, it's not very likely I can influence either side, much.
@rentmoney agree with you. Something is abnormal.
Posted using Partiko Android
If you believe corporations shed their liabilities every time new stakeholders attain majority stakes, you are no capitalist, but something else. Either Steemit Inc. made such representations to investors, or they did not.
I submit that plentiful written representations of Stinc as to their use of the stake they mined exist, and further that 4 years of history of deployment of that stake back that record up.
It is facile and disingenuous to purport that Stinc's Steem has no limitations and earmarks on it's use that differentiate it from all other stake, and since that is your position, your position is irreconcilable with extant circumstances.
Get good, or get gone. Pander to Tron somewhere else.
Show me a legal document in regards to the Steemit stake and your claims. Until you or someone else does all I'm seeing is opinions based on emotion.
I don't pander to Tron or any other company. I simply look at all the facts brush all the emotional opinions aside and come to my own conclusions.
You can research corporate law as well as anyone else. The fact is that what constitutes a contract isn't restricted to documents executed by hand in front of witnesses, and myriad precedents to this fact apply.
Why do you think prospectuses carry disclaimers? Because they can be interpreted to be contracts between advisors and investors, and thus would create liability were the disclaimers not present.
Disclaimers such as this one ....
DISCLAIMER
Steemit Inc. (The “Company”), is a private company that helps develop the open-source software that powers steemit.com, including steemd. The Company may own various digital assets, including, without limitation, quantities of cryptocurrencies such as STEEM. These assets are the sole property of the Company. Further, the Company’s mission, vision, goals, statements, actions, and core values do not constitute a contract, commitment, obligation, or other duty to any person, company or cryptocurrency network user and are subject to change at any time.
The representations Stinc and it's principals made long predate that disclaimer, and it is probably unenforceable due to that and investors reliance on those representations, as well as it's obscure placement.
There's a reason the disclaimers in prospectuses are unavoidably obvious, and this disclaimer is practically impossible for folks to find. I've never seen it before now, for example.
Lots of people sign up to different sites without ever reading any of the T&C's sites have in place. A site/company (Steemit or otherwise) can't force someone to read disclaimers and/or T&C's. They can only provide the information in a reasonable manner. The disclaimer is located in the wallet section which seems like a reasonable enough place for it to be to me.
Since you admit to never seeing it before, how can you be sure the disclaimer wasn't up before the "promises" made? It could of been in another place you haven't looked before.
No legal document that shows the Steemit Inc stake is not privately own means that it is privately owned. When push comes to shove, the legal aspect here is all that matters. If Justin Sun was to take on the same goals and promises made by the previous owner of the stake then that would be his decision but he shouldn't be strong armed to do so.
The Ninja Mined stake been alive and active on this site and now when someone uses their hard earned money to purchases millions of dollars worth of it a small group of hand selected individuals decide to fork that stake. I'm sorry but that's a real shitty thing to do. Steemit Inc. isn't the only ninja mined stake on this blockchain. I think legally, Justin Sun has allot more on his side then not.
I have my fingers crossed this all works out in the end and Hopefully Justin Sun is going to stick around to help Steem(it) and the Steem blockchain grow because after this whole fiasco who in their right mind would invest big money into a place in which treats large investors as Justin Sun has been treated.
Look, you clearly intend to pander to Tron, so I'm not gonna bother to read your screeds anymore. Here you begin by ignoring we're talking about investors spending cash, not signups for free emails, and you're obviously spinning and dodging any facts that don't support your obsequious intention. I have no interest in BS.
Have a good day.
As I said already, I pander to no company. I simply push aside emotional dribble and look at the facts. Like the fact you brought up its hard to find the disclaimer and the fact you admited to not seeing it before. I addressed both andnow you whine about the fact I adressed those comments of yours.
I ignored nothing, Justin Sun (Ned)/Steemit stake is private and if some invested in the STEEM blockchain because of his actions then great. The man has a right to sell any amount of his stake he wants to regardless of the reason you or anyone else invested.
You say you don't pander yet you say that while pandering. Scarface pointed out we only have two things in the world, our word and our balls. I hope you still have your balls, because your words are without value.
You claim to have addressed the fact that the disclaimer you tout is hidden, and late to the game, but you did not address these facts. Neither did you address why disclaimers on prospectuses are highly visible, even unavoicable, in sharp contrast to the Steemit disclaimer.
You're not avoiding drivel. You're spewing it. Did you take lessons in speaking from Roy Liu? You seem to state exactly the same nothing with your words he does.
Stop being so foolish ....
I'm sorry you are upset because I don't tow the company line you want to hear. I did address every part of your rebuttal. I already pointed out to you that I thought the Disclaimer is in a reasonable spot.
To further touch on your disclaimer claims .....Tons of sites have disclaimers written in very small text hidden to the side / at a bottom of a page or tucked away in varous other places.
The Steemit disclaimer is very clear and in big text on a page that you admit to not visting. Its nots Steemit responsiblity to hold your hand and guide you to that page. The page is not hidden and its easy to find.
More foolishness from you, at least your first foolish paragraph was a little funny. ... .try harder next time.
That's a lie. You're lying, and I will waste no more time on you.
Ok let me rephrase .... I addressed many parts of your rubuttal but its possible I missed something.......
Go get yourself some midol, you're getting too emotional.
Welcome to the internet where you will meet people who have different opinions/views as your own.
The question for some people is why would they want to stay on a chain with justin when they could pretty easily not be on the same chain.
They believe he adds discomforting centralization and has zero history of work on steem. And now instead of 4 developers just 1 experienced developer. Meaning what really can he do that we cant do ourselves with fraction of the stake.
Could the community and past steemit employees do more than justin for much less and without years of downward sales pressure?
So it maybe isnt even a matter of if those funds are his, if they properly tranfered or if we should trust him.... it becomes WHY?
A chain split is an option, however, will we lose out on SMTs, RC delegation and access to top exchanges?
Creating a sister chain that burns all of the remaining Steemit stake could go badly, on the other hand, the reduction of all that stake could improve the price of the remaining tokens. Its a gamble, but I think what we can take from this is that much of Steem's design needs to be reconsidered.
The SMT code is still available, and it was a non-Steemit dev, @howo who was doing final testing on it paid for by SPS. There might be, and probably is, some further refinement needed before it could be considered deployment ready but I think it could be done in time (and quite frankly I wasn't convinced it was going to happen very quickly with Steemit working on it either).
The others I don't know.
Okay, I was not aware of that. That would be very good news for Classic Steem if we go down that path.
If enough feel the same way as you do then to them I say, make a sister chain model after STEEM and give it a go. I'd support it but I don't support forking a man's stake that he purchased with his own funds.
I honestly dont think there are many at all that would support anything like that. Maybe a witness like that exists but certainly haven't heard of anyone willing to do that. I think people thought that was the case with 22.2 but honestly they just were worried about a hostile takeover and wanted to get @justinsunsteemit to explain his intentions. That's how I read all the witness discussions from back then people were opposed until they were convinced it was a temporary measure
They gave @justinsunsteemit just days from the AMA to the soft forking. This man is a millionaire many times over with other investments to tend to. Days is not enough time to jump to the conclusion of ........ well, lets fork his stake. The witnesses fired the first shot in this mess and Justin Sun fired back as he should. I don't agree with how he did it but I certainly knew he wasn't just going to sit back and allow his millions in invested private Steem to be messed with.
Private Stake should never be forked regardless of the situation. The only legit reason is if the private stake owner agrees to it.
I cant be 100% certain but I think that is the total consensus of witnesses. But obviously they also wanted to protect the chain. Think about this justin could have done some incredibly bad stuff when he had all 20 block producers... like really destroyed everything. It's not a matter if we think he would have it's just bad that one person could have. And at the time there was lots of talk of token swaps moving over to tron. Etc
Justin Sun bought Steemit, its his property to do with as he wants. Token Swap is a non issue for me. Anyone can offer a token swap, some may have accepted the swap but I think its likely most wouldn't have. I think the fear built around that potentail swap was unwarrated.
I understand the potential downside of Justin Sun stake but lets be honest here a handfull of people already dictate who the top witnesses are. If the witnesses are serious about the current narrative their pushing (not haven one person with too much voting power) then they need to rework the whole voting system so its more fair to those who don't have a bunch of Steem.
Thanks for your comments @jarvie. I respect your thoughts andopinion on the matter.
Multiple video and audio records of the man saying this in his own words among a boatload of other supporting evidence all saying the same damn thing is more than sufficient to me. In fact that is more compelling to me than "legal documents", which could more easily be fake, taken out of context, not necessarily properly understood by non-experts, etc.
Justin got a massive discount on this deal. How that came about in the negotiations we can only guess, but at the very least he should have known something was not as it seemed and looked into it. Was it merely a careless error by someone inexperienced and in over his head, or was it something else?
DISCLAIMER
Steemit Inc. (The “Company”), is a private company that helps develop the open-source software that powers steemit.com, including steemd. The Company may own various digital assets, including, without limitation, quantities of cryptocurrencies such as STEEM. These assets are the sole property of the Company. Further, the Company’s mission, vision, goals, statements, actions, and core values do not constitute a contract, commitment, obligation, or other duty to any person, company or cryptocurrency network user and are subject to change at any time.
Source: https://steemitwallet.com/about.html
Outlining and speaking about what their then current plans were doesn't mean plans don't change.
To date I have seen 0 legal proof the Steemit Stake wasn't privately owned. Your comment hasn't changed that fact.
I will say that, all those videos and other proof you speak of should be compiled and put in a post to support your cause. I don't like what the man did to regain his power of Stake but I also don't like that his stake was forked.
When purchasing large amount of stake or anything for that matter a discount is to be expected. People buy in bulk all the time to get discounts. Justin Sun doing it for STEEM is no shock to me.
That's been done there are several of these if not dozens.
That "Disclaimer" you posted (and the web page it is on) didn't exist until AFTER the community already discussed forking to exercise control over the stake, but ultimately decided against it, in part due to the stake no longer being powered down and hidden and instead left transparent in the steemit accounts, where the community could monitor it and measure performance in developing the ecosystem against cash outs of the stake. Why do you think Ned did that?
Ned unilaterally writing "These assets are the sole property of the Company" on his own web site in a self-serving manner does not make it so, nor obligate anyone else to believe it or agree to it in contradiction to years of representations otherwise.
I can tell you that I personally told Ned on numerous occasions going back years that I would never let him or Steemit off the hook for his commitments on how the stake would be used, and I will not.
If you came along later after Ned stopped using the existence of a block of ninja-mined (essentially premined) stake earmarked to the development of the ecosystem as a tool to recruit and encourage support for his project, and felt those disclaimers applied as a condition of your joining Steem, then that's fine for you, but I did not and they do not.
Again, proof is needed of your claims. You say its been showed many times but I been linked to 0 topics (more importanly 0 legal documents) that show your claims are true. I would suggest one clear topic with all the proof shown in it. I think it would go along way with garnering more support or at the very least more sympathy for your position.
To that I would add words are not enough, they need to be legally binding. In the end it comes down to one position for me which is, If you can't legally prove The Steemit INC. stake is not private stake then it is private stake.
I always find I'm debating for the Justin Sun side and that's not my intention. I also don't like how Justin Sun responded to all this mess but I do believe he had a right to protect his millions invested. I by no means want the STEEM community to split. I been here 2 + years and rather like all the interactions and different opinions such as ours that I come across.