Let the Peg Fail

[mhps]

This user is suspended until June 26, 2016 12:45pm.Reason: Opening a can of worms

A black humor?

Back to

I will say that if a discussion on Nazis continues from this point forward there will be consequences in the form of account suspensions.

That goes a bit too far. Taking up Nazi (oops) does not present good debating skill but it’s no big deal.

[irritant]

it was a reply in this thread to @sabreiib which has been removed, mentioning godwin’s law and something else telling sabreiib he is wrong about that, so I guess it is because @coingame warned about it

[Nagalim]

What a hostile environment… I’m very disappointed in the moderators.

This forum is turning into a joke.

I fear that I’ll be suspended for criticizing the moderators. That’s so terrible for discourse.

[Chronos]

Is @creon still banned? (He shouldn’t be.)

[irritant]

nope, he is not banned anymore as you can see on his profile page
https://discuss.nubits.com/users/creon/activity

[Sabreiib]

godwin’s law

Godwin's law

Today I know the godwin’s law for the first time, an interesting law, and I should avoid it.

I should say that some people have no basic concept of protecting private property. Anyway, godwin’s law implies that a discussion should be ended and no further conversation will be productive.

I believe that there will be little fruit from conversation with people who have different dreams.

[dysconnect]

I disagree with a lot of @creon’s words but it’s very bad to have him banned. He delivers sharp and blunt criticism, and at the times that he’s right it’s often uniquely insightful. Banning him even for just a few hours is likely to force him to leave the community again.

[Cybnate]

Waking up to a lot of fuzz here. It is a pity that this forum degraded so much in the style of the conversations and the language being used. Not very attractive for newcomers. Even I and I’m sure others start to think whether I still want to provide my spare and ‘fun’ time over here confronted with harsh language and statements driven by primary emotions of a few. What happened is bad enough, no need to make it even worse…

Today I know the godwin’s law for the first time, an interesting law, and I should avoid it.

That is the reason why I locked the thread and gave you a warning. It’s great to see you recognising that ‘law’.

I disagree with a lot of @creon’s words but it’s very bad to have him banned

I’m not a fan of banning and deleting posts. But Creon was clearly warned and still opted to proceed. Very immature behaviour apparently driven by a drive to create rifts and controversion instead of collaboration. It is no wonder that this drives others into the measures as taken which are even more heavy-handed than (temporarily) locking a thread. Not good, but no surprise.

I did lock the thread because this thread was going off-topic, potentially offensive to others and out of hand. No good would come out and unfortunately this has been proven true. Hope we all learned from that today. And if you don’t like what I did just raise a motion and I will comply.

We should find and share common believes instead of magnifying differences which do not contribute to the topic of this forum which is clearly captured in the URL: discuss Nubits. There are several other forums to discuss other topics including events in the 30s of last century at will without moderation on it, feel free to enter them in your favourite search engine and ‘have fun’ elsewhere.

[zoro]

https://twitter.com/DavidBCollum/status/747618866935762944
we learned this the hard way, didn’t we?

[Sabreiib]

Steve Jobs never buy back.

[cryptog]

Why is it the dumbest money on the planet?

[zoro]

i guess because the buybacks don’t offer a real value to the “company”.
just make the shareholders richer.
then it is logical for the big shareholders to vote for this procedure and sell their shares.
I had seen this sell behavior in every single week we had the buybacks and wondered why,
now i know!

[Sabreiib]

just make the shareholders richer.

makes the shareholders who sell richer, and those not sell “looks like” richer.

[crypto_coiner]

What happens if my motions gets 50% and then phoenix motion gets 50% a day later? What if the opposite is the case?

Motions are a very nice tool for opinion mining but not sufficiently powerful to define a true state over time, which is required to define something like laws or even contracts.

Great point – I agree absolutely.
I would even go further – motions are not sufficient to enforce a true state, unfortunately.
This crisis has demonstrated this weakness.

We need NuLaw and it must be respected. Anyone who doesn’t respect it should be rejected by shareholders and any one who claims to be a friend of Nu. Shareholders will do just that (reject NuLaw violators), but unfortunately that takes a little time.

Let me make a bold and provocative statement : It seems very well that @JordanLee and @Phoenix is frustrated that his motion system is limited because it cannot guarantee the enforcing of execution of motions – and the quick “solution” he hastily has come to is: concentrating a fair amount of minting power (perhaps aiming at 50%) so that he can pick up who he wants and order whatever instruction he desires –
But not only is it short-sighted and vain over a distributed& permissionless network, but it also defeats the blockchain essence.

[GreatScott]

If Jordan is thinking as @crypto_coiner theorized, and he nominates himself as such, is Nu even still a DAO?

Is it even autonomous?

… Is it even an organization??

[backpacker]

I am afraid nu has to prove itself as the dao in that situation or fail and become sham. It’s really up to us.

[Sabreiib]

Great point – I agree absolutely.I would even go further – motions are not sufficient to enforce a true state, unfortunately.This crisis has demonstrated this weakness.

That’s why reputed signers are needed, in B&C’s mechanism, reputed signers are executors, if existing executors don’t obey the decision of motion passed, new executors will be elected. There is competition among reputed signers candidates.

[crypto_coiner]

That’s why reputed signers are needed, in B&C’s mechanism, reputed signers are executors

I did not see it that way.
Very good point.
Can we have reputation for any type of execution?
Not just signing

[Sabreiib]

Reputed signers are something like “board of directors” in real world, they manage the daily operation of a company. I guess any type of execution, such as software dev payment, liquidity providing, or exchange (B&C) can be performd by them.

In an extreme situation, where the decentralized decision making(motions vote) is not quick enough to handle the crisis, reputed signers can execute with their proffesional experience, and responsible for the consequence.

We need to combine the merits of centralized and decentralzied systems, trade off bewteen efficiency and fairness. This is democracy.

[cryptog]

We need to combine the merits of centralized and decentralzied system

agreed.