You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Community communication of the code

in LeoFinancelast month

You vote for witneses and they introduce, communicate and implement the changes in protocol apart running hardware for block production don't they?

I get that not everybody that are implementing changes and write code are witnesses. But it should be that most prominent actors that influence those changes are voted for witnesses and their job should be to inform their community about incoming updates and discuss it. In a perfect world i.e.

Now there is a big disconnect. Witnesses are on one side, dev team on the other and community somewhere else. That is a trait of decentralised governance with no prominent leader. While it seems very democratic it is quie unefficient at the same time. People need leaders, that is harwired into our nature.

Posted using Dapplr


I do think that all witnesses (consensus) should offer their perspective on the hardfork - but I would like to see them come to some kind of point where the candidate is at least made very, very publicly aware to give everyone a chance to get onboard or weigh in or whatever.

Decentralized governance is likely (for a long time to come) going to be inefficient, but at least it isn't so efficient it favors only 0.1% of the community.