Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 24, 2019, 06:16:18 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 19, 2019, 09:41:50 AM

Quote from: EmilioMann on September 13, 2019, 06:49:12 PM

LOL the fudders decided to make a coordinated attack.
As has been said a thousand times before, but gembitz e jwinterm ignore, the premine was distributed via airdrop to the community and the other half was not for "the developers" but for the "development fund", which is also used to pay marketing, designers, events, etc.

About the vote, you must also have more than 60% of your total votes for your proposal to be validated.
You may have the most votes "yes", but if many of the other people clicked "no" on your proposal, you will need more votes to reach 60% of the total (yes+no).

Please don't do that. Taking the easy way out of the debate by shouting "FUD". Remember, that in Decred, changes/new features that were voted, and hard forked in the network, cannot simply be changed back to the state it was in before.

I believe when Decred becomes large enough, it will also go through the same problems that Bitcoin did, like the "scaling debate".

Anyone else have a reply? Please post them. I'm really starting to believe that "blockchain governance" of any form might not be the solution we thought it that it might be.

RICHLIST DEVELOPER governance you mean? bwaa pfft ===> BITTREX PHISHING TEAM OWNS THIS DECRED UP AND DOWN & SIDEWAYS.