I'll say it again, personal attacks only reflect poorly on yourself, and they're probably part of the reason why alt and so many others (Hoskinson comes to mind) are no longer active in this community.
Again, they are asking for it. Antidilution gang had started their attack against Bitshares long before I become really pissed of at them. They have been asked nicely to explain and defend their point of view. But so far nothing.
As a DAC we all should be on a same page. We should all know how we are going on, otherwise things like marketing are really hard. How we can create a positive image about Bitshares, when there is really big minority that is against all development? What do you think that newbies think when they start to learn about Bitshares? How you think we can attract new developers when there is open hostility against them?
I have been very open about my perspective on DAC and it's development. So far nobody from the antidilution gang hasn't criticized it in any meaningful way. Why?
And Hoskinson didn't recieve any personal attacks AFAIK. He ragequitted because one of his posts was moved to a more suitable subforum. If somebody can't handle that, he is probably quite difficult person to cooperate with, so I'm not surprised that he has left many other communities too.
The current state is that all serious worker proposals have enough votes to be active, regardless of alt's stance, so your argument that the anti-dilution crowd is "making sure that Bitshares won't gain any momentum" is an obvious strawman.
Then explain to me how Bitshares can gain momemtum if all development is stopped? This is what the antidilution gang wants.
I suspect alt and co feel that the current feature set is more than enough to compete with most other cryptos out there, and that what Bitshares needs more than anything else is feature stability. We keep on increasing the complexity of Bitshares by adding feature upon feature, but perhaps feature creep and additional complexity are not what we need at this point in time. Bitshares is already quite complex and hard to grasp for newcomers, so there's certainly a case to be made for reducing complexity rather than adding to it.
If this is their stance, they should explain that rather than quitting all communication and attacking Bitshares. What they are doing now isn't helping anybody.
I'm of the opinion that any major value added to Bitshares will come from third parties building services utilizing the blockchain itself, not from worker proposals or "marketing" paid by workers, and for that to happen we need stability.
Then why antidilution gang is also against things like xeroc's documentation which will be very much needed when other businesses are built on Bitshares blockchain?
Show Posts
