the the SP lock for two years was never executed No, the SP lock for two years was there till authumn 2016, then changed for 3 month. But the proposed compulsary convertion from SBD was never executed

FYI the current SBD design is different from that described in the earlier version of Steem White Paper. The WP suggested the(partially) compulsary conversion from SBD to Steem Power in case SBD debt ratio

Wouldn't the implementing of the RC market be the straightaway solution to the problem?

A private company is always an enigma. For all what we know Steemit inc might be allready sold to Mark Zuckerberg long ago) So my impression from 2018 was "milking and abandoning", in 2019 it

I think their plan was to "freeze" Steem in its current stage and to launch a new project instead, which would be something like "upgraded Steem with SMT" from the tech point of view.

You might be interested to see this post from Dan Larimer on Medium about decentralization, suggesting some plausible solutions

Personaly I would be happy with the proposal, but it looks like there's some concern about network security, as it's expressed by @smooth Dan is suggesting more complex solution, quoting reference To summarize

There's an interesting post from Dan Larimer on Medium about decentralization, suggesting some plausible solutions

you don't want relatively small(er) amounts of stake to ever be able to elect any witness, and certainly not multiple witnesses But why not actually? People use to describe this situation as an

It was always my desire to have an internal SP/Steem market, but your suggestion seem to be much easier to realize.

Yes, because it makes sense)

Shouldn't all stakeholders have an input earlier in the cycle Yes, and it was never a case. I would really appreciate a system in which we have a fixed maximum percentage for any budget line minus the

And the biggest positive change in fiat world would be to simply get rid of the possibility to borrow your money to other people, I guess ?

The selling pressure is mostly from Steemit inc, officially it's about 800k Steem monthly and probably the comparable amount under the table. They could go on like that yet another 2-3 years.

If you want some conspiracy, the reason might be, Ned and Co want to launch some new project, let's call it NedIt aka Steem with SMT, for which they want once again secure about 80-90% for themselves.

No. Yes only if downvoted rewards would be actually burned, not just redistributed to less unfortunate other abusers)

Yes, I thought that maybe witnesses don't like to be under attack of not-content content creators on day-by-day basis. A SPS proposal looks like palatable substitute.

I could never understand why it have to be ether 25/75 or 50/50, but not the calculated mediane of vitnesses voted parameters. The same principle could be applied to the size of the downvote pool and in

I don't think this economic failure have anything to do with the curation model. And actually the failure of falling from $0.30 to $0.05 as it's the case of Golos isn't so much different to falling from

Most of parameters there could be changed by witnesses without any hardfork. By now the majority of top-witnesses have voted for linear rewards and zero minutes early voting penalty. The actual consensus