Generally I don't comment on the articles I read, I haven't participated in the platform for a long time but I always try to be aware of what's going on. Today I find that the mood here is very agitated and I want to allow myself to give my opinion if anyone is interested. I speak on behalf of the community I did not know about steem, of those more than 5000 users who follow my account of which perhaps many are inactive by not finding what they expected or seeing too hard a way. I want to summarize what I have found and please correct the areas where I am wrong. We have always been crying out for investors to be able to keep breathing, then one appears @justinsunsteemit who invests so much money that they buy about 20% of the shares. But since that is a lot of influence, we are afraid of not knowing or suspecting what he might do with that power and we try to block him. The user moves his influence in some exchange houses to defend himself from that attack and at the same time he counteracts taking control of everything, then he appears here trying to convince us that it is something temporary and of his intentions by means of A Roadmap but the indignation that those who lost the power feel leads them to attack him by means of comments and protest actions.

This is my point of view on:

The purchase of steemit inc. is something you'll notice is a good thing because a major investor has set his sights on our platform.

Fear of abuse of power

As far as the rules are the same for all users where SPs represent the influence a user has or can have on the platform, a user who invests a lot is entitled to that Influence he has bought (it is his investment). SF should not have been applied just to affect this user, since it is not a decentralized act. I agree that we should protect ourselves from one person deciding for millions, but why wasn't it applied globally so that no one with more than 300K SP could vote? Maybe that affected the interests of many who are offended today?

If we really want decentralization something like this should have been done to choose our witnesses: votes under 500 SP add up to one when collectively they reach 500 SP, above that every vote is worth 1, the delegations do not count. We will have witnesses really elected by the community and not by whales as it is now or was before. Because what the new investor has done now will happen before without anyone being bothered, for example a user with 2 votes from 500K SP users had more right to be a witness than a user with 500 votes from users with 100SP, is that a fair election? Well, they wanted to prevent someone else from doing what many were already doing.

I think that the solution to the conflict is to implement a vote like the one I have described so that the community really chooses its Witnesses and does not continue to attack someone who not only put faith in our platform but who is still open to dialogue.

By the way, if he has influence in the exchange houses he is in my opinion an excellent ally.