I ask witness to change SQP from 1500 to 1100,
all people object at the first, then several witness agree with me, but they all change back to 1500 only because of BM said 1500 is right
finally when we change it back to 1100, many user have lost their money
I ask community pause force settlement to avoid a possible unfair robbing
almost all people object me, they say I do it for Chinese commilitee, they focus on what's fault but not the problem itself,
they said this is not a problem because it's always there from the beginning.
we are lucky the committee have agree this proposal, although many seems not happy for this
people think I'm overthought, but do I? trader is not kids's game, do you really want do a serial business based this toy system?
I ask correct the settlement's volume limit from 20% to 2%
many people unsatisified me again, and other people nobody can make sure if I am right, they just want to wait BM's advice.
no any Judgement again.
I ask committee correct it before reenable settlement,
but they said they must keep their promise to reenable force settlement, even don't care about if this is a security problem.
because user's security is not their responsibility to consider
after all these, I got disapoint only
I will continue my noise, just vote me out if I am not satisfied you.
Not particularly related to your issue, but people don't like thinking what to do, they like being told what to do. People are sheep, and thus is the world we live in.
I ask community pause force settlement to avoid a possible unfair robbing
trader is not kids's game, do you really want do a serial business based this toy system?
This is not fair to the short.
so I suggest to stop market engine emergency
Not particularly related to your issue, but people don't like thinking what to do, they like being told what to do. People are sheep, and thus is the world we live in.
Who are you calling sheep? Bytemaster shouldn't make our decisions, but we should understand the intended design and rationale behind a setting we're considering to change, and then have a discussion about it. Such changes should NOT be rushed or slipped in under the cover of darkness.
P.S. Blindly following someone requires little thinking. So too does blindly disregarding them.
I ask witness to change SQP from 1500 to 1100,
all people object at the first, then several witness agree with me, but they all change back to 1500 only because of BM said 1500 is right
finally when we change it back to 1100, many user have lost their money
I ask community pause force settlement to avoid a possible unfair robbing
almost all people object me, they say I do it for Chinese commilitee, they focus on who's fault but not the problem itself,
they said this is not a problem because it's always there from the beginning.
we are lucky the committee have agree this proposal, although many seems not happy for this
people think I'm overthought, but do I? trader is not kids's game, do you really want do a serial business based this toy system?
I ask correct the settlement's volume limit from 20% to 2%
many people unsatisified me again, and other people nobody can make sure if I am right, they just want to wait BM's advice.
no any Judgement again.
I ask committee correct it before reenable settlement,
but they said they must keep their promise to reenable force settlement, even don't care about if this is a security problem.
because user's security is not their responsibility to consider
after all these, I got disapoint only
I will continue my noise, just vote me out if I am not satisfied you.
I ask witness to change SQP from 1500 to 1100,
all people object at the first, then several witness agree with me, but they all change back to 1500 only because of BM said 1500 is right
finally when we change it back to 1100, many user have lost their money
I ask community pause force settlement to avoid a possible unfair robbing
almost all people object me, they say I do it for Chinese commilitee, they focus on who's fault but not the problem itself,
they said this is not a problem because it's always there from the beginning.
we are lucky the committee have agree this proposal, although many seems not happy for this
people think I'm overthought, but do I? trader is not kids's game, do you really want do a serial business based this toy system?
I ask correct the settlement's volume limit from 20% to 2%
many people unsatisified me again, and other people nobody can make sure if I am right, they just want to wait BM's advice.
no any Judgement again.
I ask committee correct it before reenable settlement,
but they said they must keep their promise to reenable force settlement, even don't care about if this is a security problem.
because user's security is not their responsibility to consider
after all these, I got disapoint only
I will continue my noise, just vote me out if I am not satisfied you.
I missed that post from bytemaster. And cryptofresh doesn't seem to indicate who created the proposal. It would have been nice for committee members to be explicit about this as their rationale for quickly voting the 20%-->2% change, otherwise it looks to stakeholders like you're not being deliberate enough, especially after the previous controversial proposal that was voted through. Anyway, it looks like things are falling into place. Thanks.
- you promise to vote for reversal, and yet instead for doing just that and voting for the (20% to 2% change) at the same time, both taking place in the same time you chose to say this "What will you do if I do not vote for reversal? Cry like a baby?"I think alt meant "What will you do if I do