The Hive exclude list (and me being on it)

There has been a lot written and thoughts shared about Hive's exclude list, and the accounts that have their assets frozen. I'm writing this so some of the communities know why I haven't followed them on Hive (yet) as well as to formulate my own response to some posts about the lists where I'm mentioned.

My votes "against" the old witnesses

I'll take you back to the moment the shift in witnesses happened. At that moment I wasn't as active on Steem as I once was. I was working at home, stressed out of my mind trying to make it to a deadline for work. Until suddenly I got spammed with messages from various discord users and groups telling me to vote for the "old" witnesses. After kindly telling people that I don't participate in the witness debate, I trust that others will do what's best for the communities and I really have to finish what I'm working on before I would even look into it, some decided to be rather persistent on the matter.

Confronted yet again with a programming error in the script I had to finish by the next day, I got yet another message telling me that I have to vote. Now this is the part where I reacted emotionally, mostly frustrated with my work I thought: "so you want me to vote? Sure I'll vote!".

The consequences

When I cast my votes I never understood the impact of the situation, even if my steempower isn't that high. The symbolic value is arguably higher. I admit we all have our flaws and I'm sure any of you reading has had a moment where everything piling up has caused you to do or say something that you regret afterwards. While my reaction at the time felt justified by the thought "if some people want to be childish, I can be childish as well" I never meant to provoke anyone or understood how this would affect the people and their communities who are building what we have day by day with little return.

Why I never looked into witnesses

I've never got myself involved in the whole witness debate, nor what weight the witnesses have on this blockchain. I understood representatives of the community where chosen who function as "miners", and where able to, in agreement with the chosen witnesses, push updates to the chain.

I will tell you that I'm not the biggest fan of the witness system. It feels that this system is much like any "centralized" government where the rulers are elected and have the power to make decisions that are not necessarily in favor of the people that chose them as their representative. The reason why I'm telling you my opinion, while it might feel maybe a bit off-topic, is that this is the biggest reason why I never looked into the witnesses.

Additionally, I never voted before - except for once for @ignis-witness, because those lads where doing such great work for @vimm (which I was involved with at the time, and I truly wanted to help them) - because I didn't feel it was justified to vote for people in "power" if I don't know much about it. Voting for "representatives" should always be done with full knowledge about a) what you're voting for and b) what you're voting against. If you don't follow the affairs in these matter it's better to not cast a vote because it gives the people's that do follow these affairs their vote a higher weight.

The risk of the exclude list

From the little bit I read, there are valid points that an exclude list hold, here are some of my personal worries:

• The communities' chosen block chain prospers the most by being inviting towards everyone, discluding/freezing part of the community feels as it goes against the core values of what is probably the #1 value of the block chain, breaking the core values is what started this whole revolution after all
• The people that were misinformed - not fully aware (in my case the latter with a slight combination of being a fool at the moment as well) of what was happening are "punished" as well
• People should be free to have and express other opinions. over the course of time new situations arise and new ideas are formed. Improvement won't happen with everyone sharing the same opinion and everyone should be free to open a debate without being judged. There is great value in questioning existing values and addressing concerns. Improvement can only be introduced by identifying what doesn't work (anymore). Even if it goes public opinion from time to time everyone should be allowed to address their ideas/thoughts/concerns and open an adult debate about it. Even if it doesn't result into change it will always further educate the people participating, listening or reading the debate and that alone is already of great value - "scientia potentia"

Looking at it from Hive's point of view

It’s of course easy to say all of this is wrong if you’re on the exclude list yourself. But, taking the timeline of everything that happened into account there are certainly multiple arguments to introduce the exclude list.

• Disagreeing and debating on certain matters are perfectly fine, there are multiple ways of doing so. I understand that people that made the matter personal or hostile before the fork might need a bit more justification to why they want to follow the people they hold a grudge against
• The argument “Why would people that voted against us, follow us? They didn’t trust us in the first place” actually holds some weight. There is some hypocrisy in following the people/technology in which one stated they don’t trust in.
• Third and probably most important reason: The time span between the start of Justin's takeover and the launch of Hive was super short. Creating a hard fork like this, as well as the tools that supports them in such a short time frame takes a lot if not all the people that worked on it their energy (not to mention resources without knowing if you’ll get anything back). It’s simply impossible to discuss or analyze every single matter in depth. Take into account that the hard fork would most likely lose a lot of its credibility if postponed too long. It’s not weird - actually very common in every company where software is written - that matters that can be addressed after the launch are met with temporal solutions.

With the proposal system people still can explain or justify themselves. Taking everything into account, it’s not weird that Hive’s communities at least deserve an explanation.

Side Note

While I wasn’t really active the last year this whole situation is an reminder of the work that is inserted by the individuals and communities. There is some poetic justice in the creation of Hive.

For now I'm a bit on the fence in whether I should be creating content on Hive, being excluded I fear I might provoke some of you by doing so (which is why I'm for the time being I'm posting it on Steem rather than Hive) but you can be sure that I'm "consuming" Hive's content to the fullest.

Note: that was a month ago, I was actually welcomed back with open arms by the communities I used to be a part of

Extra side note

While I have your attention: due to the Corona thread there's a golden opportunity to promote the block chain to the fullest. There's a whole world know that is forced to stay inside looking at a computer screen right now.

Staying inside right now instead of any outdoor activity and promoting the block chain could literately save lives. Even if you're not afraid of getting the virus, think about the dozens of people in your surrounding that might have a more difficult time fighting the virus.