Quote from: feirm on June 20, 2018, 02:04:18 PM

Quote from: michele1it on June 19, 2018, 07:53:10 PM

Quote from: feirm on June 19, 2018, 09:52:47 AM

Thank you for all the support you have all been showing recently over here and in our other servers! Yesterday, we published a development update for June 2018, so if you have the time please read it. Development is back to its normal pace and we have some things coming which we have been working on behind the scenes.

https://medium.com/feirm/feirm-development-update-june-2018-eac57db15db5

Sorry for an obvious question ... the proposal to change the collateral will naturally be subject to the vote of the masternodes that in the blockchain with masternodes are the only ones to be able to decide on the governance of the blockchain ... you teach me ... right?

We have not made a voting proposition on the blockchain as this is a decision made by the team. We could have proposed a vote on the blockchain, but we feel the results would have been low, due to the process of actually submitting a vote, it is quite tedious.

I was very supportive of your project, we have recently discussed privately through Telegram (I suppose you are Jack the CTO) and I think I showed it when we discussed the "jam list" question. Now instead I will be very hard as I'm almost never and believe me I'm sorry to have to be. Too bad, I never wanted to hear the answer you gave! Because your answer is really disconcerting and I do not think your tender age is enough as a joke (from the photo you look young enough and I tried to find an excuse in this, but I can not I'm sorry!). Once the blockchain is put into motion the team can not decide anything on the blockchain nor can it decide the users of Discord (on which no one can be sure that they are real, while those who put the grain in the masternodes is real). The team has every right to decide on the project (in the case of Feirm you can decide what you want on the "marketplace" even without consulting anyone) but on the blockchain no, once the blockchain has come to life it must self-govern and the voting power touches of right to the masternodes. If it's too complicated to understand maybe you should go and study other projects using masternodes. If it is still too complicated to understand, you should think of joint stock companies ... blockchain shareholders are the masternodes (possibly also the stakeholders as staking is expected in Feirm).
On Discord, you can discuss the proposals or wherever you want, but once the blockchain and the masternodes network is active the decision must take the masternodes that represent the allocated resources. If this decision is taken without voting it will be a blow to the image of the project, after all you can not expect the whole world to live on Discord, there are many supporters of the project (read: people who put money in the masternodes because he appreciates the project) but does not participate in Discord and certainly in a truly decentralized system the decisions on governance take the network of masternodes, not the team or the Discord channel, if that were the case would be very serious. I speak for the interest in the project because I have no problem putting on many nodes with a major collateral but it would be worth very soon after an event in which it is decided to change the collateral, because I repeat the collateral is an issue that governance and once the network is active only the masternodes can decide through the voting system, the team or community can discuss and decide on the project (the Feirm project ie the marketplace) but can not decide on the governance of the blockchain because this would not be true decentralization. Be careful, the Discord game can not decide on the governance of the blockchain, it would not be serious. I am administrator of several Italian Telegram groups with hundreds and even thousands of users, both generic and dedicated to the masternodes and I have always pushed the Feirm project as an undervalued project to follow and on which it was worth to aim, but if something like that happens a change to the collateral established without the governance mechanism reserved for the masternodes (needless to turn around, the masternodes have this role in the blockchain with masternodes, better understand it from the beginning) I will have to revise my position towards the project. After all, a larger number of masternodes puts the network in safety this is obvious and everyone knows it, so the sense of drastically reducing the number does not understand it. For those who have doubts about what I support I'll give you a small example: I'm following another project (which I do not name for correctness towards you) and after a few days that the first masternodes were activated some users with little experience obviously did the classic question to the team if there was a risk that the collateral could change (increase) ... the team response was just as obvious: ONLY THE MASTERNODES CAN DECIDE A THING OF THE KIND, VOTING BY THE SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE. There is no other way to change the collateral. You are still in time to realize that you are making a big mistake as well as committing an abuse of the governance system. If you continue on this path that you have taken and which leads nowhere, you will be out of the rules of the blockchain and the masternodes will no longer make any sense in your system because they have been deprived of their rights and their functions. If the kids who talk on Discord (if they are real users) have the right to decide instead of the masternodes that put the money ... then Feirm ends here. I'm sorry but it's not a game and so I have to be so hard even if I do not want to. Reflect why you are still in time and one day you will realize that you have done well at a crossroads that was taking you to the wrong place to take the right path at the last moment! Do the right thing!