What a crazy 24 hours, narrating my understanding of ninja stakes

in steem •  8 months ago  (edited)

Never have I thought I witness 2 political drama in my lifetime; one on my own beloved country; and one in my own beloved blockchain

It has been so crazy, and all I can say was when Malaysia is out of control at the moment from very unethical exercise of politics; the #steem blockchain is something that could still be in salvaged.

I have listened to quite a number of Youtube updates and tweeters (gosh I have never been so active in Tweeter in my life before) after listening to the latest witnesses and talking to @justinsunsteemit I suddenly came by with a story narrative.


Once upon a time

There was a land, empty, desolate; and untouched. There came 2 people, who saw potential of the land, and they acquired it, and there they started building.

In this land, there was a house they built by these 2 persons. It was not just an ordinary house for residence, it was a very special house. It became part of the land to provide new comers with temporary shelter, fruits of harvest for new comers to enjoy, and tools to help new comers to settle down the land and cultivate with their God given talents.

The house became an agreement between the owners of the house with the new comers, later becomes settlers; that the house will never be demolished, and will always be the first shelter for new comers.

The settlers are welcome to stay in the land, and access to the house when needed, as long as they keep their bargain to keep the land fruitful.

Soon more new comers came and new settlers dwell in this land, the land slowly becomes nourished, and slowly, no longer desolate.

The owners also hired other people to come tend the land and the house with the equipment in the house, so that new comers can continue to learn, become dwellers and later settlers in the land.

Some settlers became prosperous in the land, and started building their own houses and equipment to tend the land, keeping the land fruitful.


The owner and the most capable settlers continued to have an agreement to keep the house intact for new comers; they become shareholders of the land, and the land was fruitful.


Along the way, one of the owner left the house and the land, and acquired somewhere else of greener pastures.


4 years gone by:

The house is still kept, but the weather wasn't too good. Not all the crops yield on the land was fruitful enough to sustain the many household in the land; but the shareholders of the land continued to tend the land, and brought in outside resources and equipment to upkeep the land, and the land still produce fruit for new comers and dwellers.


One day...

The owner of the house decided to sell the house away to a new owner, with all the equipment in it, and the house stewards now serves the new owner.

However the land that was once desolate and empty, now filled with other smaller houses and there are plenty of settlers and dwellers tend to the land, and reap of its harvest.

The new owner of the house sees the house, and thinks he can resell the house as its fruit for better profit, and maybe, introduce his own house and design, with his own equipment to tend the land, and even to yield different harvest; with the stewards, the settlers and the dwellers in the land.

But the shareholders stewarding the land and the previous owner had an agreement. The initial house that was built was to nourish the new comers, to acquaint themselves to the land until they can tend their own harvest in parts of the land. It was not for selling off and chopped down into pieces.

However, the first owner who sold the house to the new owner, didn't state so and left.

The shareholders and stewards of the land were worried that the new owner will damage the original house with its fruit. They built a hedge around it; and the new owner was not able to access to the house he bought.

The new owner was shocked and upset, calling the shareholder stewards thieves.

The new owner called for professional services to start occupy the parts of the land around the house where the first settlers dwell and tended the land, so that they can remove the hedge to the house and grab hold to it.


Pushed aside by the new professional services the shareholder stewards were unable to tend the land, and the land's harvest was affected; the shareholder stewards gathered all the new comers and dwellers to help them to reoccupy the land they dwell in order to keep the land producing the fruits as normal.


And within 24 hours, 10 of the 20 shareholder stewards regained the land, and stopped the new owner from removing the hedge.


So based on the story, who was right, and who was wrong?

  • If there was a solid agreement between the owner and the shareholder stewards, would a sale changes its agreement?
  • If the house was sold, and a new sale and purchase agreement made; should the seller remove the original agreement and sell it like just normal property?

This is a lot to take in. haha.

Like it or not, the original owner that sold the house, with or without the same paper agreement, has the money and left the land


In the mean time, if you have never exercised your witness votes before, you should do so.

Let the stewards try to talk some sense to the new owners with a better occupancy of the land that is now in trouble.


Until Then

This post is powering up to keep my witness votes vested
1% is to be sent to @null for burning

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Very good analogy. Maybe you should add an update now that proxy.token has unvoted our witnesses because whatever ideas the Korean community had over downvoting.

Oh that has to be Chapter 2!

  ·  8 months ago (edited)

I might have jumped the gun there. Apparently there's two questions; the 0.22.2 fork that they protested by removing witness votes 8 days ago, and then the downvote issue they had had a beef with.

And now it looks like they are voting in Justin's bots.

6zi0ur.png
9csahg.png
opaupn.png

Update: And now they've re-voted the witnesses back. Things are changing a bit too fast.

Yeah, some of the top 20 witnesses actually had a beef with them, because of the quality content / something.

Sounds good! 😁

Oh and thank you for resteeming !trdo

You are welcome!

Wait, what's up with the Koreans? The plot is thickening by the minute.

  ·  8 months ago (edited)

Remember when we were at the SteemFest, the main complaint of the Korean representative was the downvoting of posts on Steem. For some reason it's been a perpetual thorn in their side. They'd want to remove downvoting altogether.

Anyhow, it seems either proxy.token has reversed their decision, or the exchanges have unvoted Justin's bots, since 7 of the real witnesses were some hours ago reinstated back into the top 20.

Remember when we were at the SteemFest, the main complaint of the Korean representative was the downvoting of posts on Steem. For some reason it's been a perpetual thorn in their side. They'd want to remove downvoting altogether.

Right. I can't figure why they keep holding on to that grudge.

Because people see posting and curating as building interest on their investment, and when you downvote, you take away their interest.

I don't agree, but can see where they are coming from.

Posted via Steemleo

Yeah, I also see where their coming from, they seem to take it too personally, I wonder whether its a cultural thing. Downvoting is still very much needed, because there's no other way for the community to regulate otherwise, I hope they'd at least understand that.

Simple. Some witness (who might have great miscommunication) has been beefing with them.

Well, if he was just wanting to call all those little houses something else, and give them a new flag that would be one thing.

But, he wants to take all those little houses, and get the people to move out of them to give them similar houses on a whole new land.

People don't want to move... what about their goats?

Posted via Steemleo

LOL... And that is also a real world scenario when low cost flats / village ouses of a place is under a (usually) state government but a developer bought the whole land along with the flat, and wanted to redo it into a multi-storey service apartment (as an example), and tried to vacade the people staying there; offering them (maybe) discounted / free units of the new service apartment, and people refuse to move.

This happened to my born state before. My mom's ancestor's house were offered a sum of money to vacade to make a new condominium. Some fought; but eventually because the government never gave a proper ownership grant of the land to those village houses, the developer eventually wins.

In the end, my uncle who stayed there, not only didn't get a new unit, he only got like 10% of the land value of what the ancestor's place was; which was big (there were 2 houses and 2 yards combined)

Thank you for your support. Here's a !shop as token of appreciation.

Wah! You made me mouth watering!

你好鸭,littlenewthings!

@bossku给您叫了一份外卖!

@jjprac jjprac 迎着飓风 骑着村长家后院的鹿 给您送来
大闸蟹

吃饱了吗?跟我猜拳吧! 石头,剪刀,布~

如果您对我的服务满意,请不要吝啬您的点赞~
@onepagex

rock!


It’s a tie! 平局!再来!下回我再出拳头!

rock!


You lose! 你输了!愿赌服输,请给我点赞~

rock!


It’s a tie! 平局!再来!下回我再出拳头!

If there was a solid agreement between the owner and the shareholder stewards, would a sale changes its agreement?

I think the largest shareholders/owner has the right to decide based on what he deemed right,he has the most power here to make decision. Another different story if there are written agreement agreed/signed by largest shareholder and all parties involved.

If the house was sold, and a new sale and purchase agreement made; should the seller remove the original agreement and sell it like just normal property?

Based on my points on the 1st answer, that depends on the largest shareholders to decide, also new owner from the purchase is excluded from the conflict between old owner and the shareholder stewart, because he/new owner see the purchase based on the new agreement made by old owner and himself,the new owner. On the other hand, the shareholder stewards should negotiate nicely and explain nicely why he/new owner should not take the house he/new owner already paid of because of the previous written agreement(if any) between them and the old owner/seller.

hi @littlenewthings thank you for invite me here and sharing our opinion. that is how i see the situation based on the information i known of.

Regards,
inri

No problem @cryptokannon , that is why it is better for you to understand the time-line that I understood in a narrative form, which gives layman a better view of how things happened.

The interesting part was that the shareholder stewards did try to explain, if you have listened to the most recent meeting; but however both side are not backing down.

  1. Shareholders stewards request to retract the hostile word "hackers", but refused.
  2. New owner insist on liquidating the house that aids the new comers = aid development progress.

But during this conversation, professional services continue to occupy the whole land but with borrowed assets without consent.

So who is doing what?

So far only one side is saying one thing; but doing another behind based on the history transactions.

Love your story.
Still believe that the actions taken by the witnesses was a huge mistake.
Lets just hope that they get sane soon and start the process of reconciliation in earnest.

Yes I agree. But then again there was a question that there were accusation that Tron started creating the accounts the day he acquired Steemit Inc; and those accounts are now the 22.5 witnesses. These were way before witnesses colluded and create a reversible soft fork (hence the hedge, not a steel fort) to find out what is going on.

Therefore, there are A LOT of mess to clean up and clear up much misunderstanding.

Hi @littlenewthings!

Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 3.900 which ranks you at #2785 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has dropped 153 places in the last three days (old rank 2632).

In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 78 contributions, your post is ranked at #29.

Evaluation of your UA score:
  • You're on the right track, try to gather more followers.
  • The readers like your work!
  • Try to work on user engagement: the more people that interact with you via the comments, the higher your UA score!

Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server