Recently I had the unfortunate task of removing @fervi's private witness channel role for the second time, pending review and internal voting from the rest of the witnesses without consent. Please note @fervi still has access to public areas of Discord and to the public witness channel for updates.
It is noted that he previously had the private witness role removed for breaching internal communication security by screenshotting internal posts of mine and other witnesses. some of which would have de-escalated internally and would not have had the need to create FUD (for lack of a better word) to the rest of the community and create community-wide unrest.
After a similar internal vote witnesses agreed to re-instate his role, this time however the results were at the time of writing 18/1 in favour of not re-instating the role a second time. The reason for the post is that @fervi wanted me to disclose who the witnesses were that voted, I said I could not do this, but instead would publish the results and ask witnesses who witnessed the poll results to attest in comment on this post, whether the results are true and correct. By doing this they are not disclosing their vote preference unless they wish, but just attesting the authenticity of results.
To placate @fervi I have taken the time to write this post, witnesses took the time to deliberate and vote and some even commented on his Blurt post and asked some pertinent questions.
Sequence of Events
-@fervi requested that Blurt Core add his account creation app to the official signup landing page.
-We requested the source code or to open source, but instead of complying and producing the code, the reply we received was that the front end can be audited and the code wasn't necessary to be open sourced.
-I took this info to @saboin and @tekraze to check the frontend code and confirm if safe.
-Before they even had time to investigate, @fervi had already gone public to declare his dissatisfaction that his app wasn't being listed
-The concerns we had were the following:
A) Storage of keys (on backend and email server when sending)
B) Retention of user emails related to created accounts and the potential use thereof for doxxing purposes and/or phishing and illicit marketing.
C) Recovery account risk
D) Leak risk of private keys and emails, especially given previous willful leak incidents.
E) @fervi's association with ctime who has been at odds with Blurt Core and the potential of a trojan horse app to discredit Blurt Core for endorsing it.
-In the meantime @fervi went ahead and posted a sensational post on Hive and Blurt:
https://hive.blog/blurt/@fervi/fud-from-megadrive-how-do-you-fool-people
https://hive.blog/blurt/@fervi/fud-from-megadrive-how-do-you-fool-people
In this post @fervi accused the foundation (without proof) that it was receiving back-handed income from Symbionts from their account creation app, sensationalised the Paypal payment processor used by Symbionts to be a risk of stealing funds from user accounts, and created general FUD against Blurt Core and my person, as well as inciting war and unrest, with statements and titles like "War between the community and the Blurt Foundation" and "Let's create the real "FUD"".
-The fact that this was posted on Hive seems to serve the purpose to recruit haters of Blurt and myself to further destabilize Blurt and is conduct not suited to top 20 witnesses who should be promoting Blurt and not destabilising it. Fortunately, @fervi's reputation (10) on Hive is low and didn't get much support.
-At this point I made a poll internally to have his private witness role remain removed and informed @fervi.
-Some witnesses gathered more info and commented, example:
https://blurt.blog/@nalexadre/riuuto
-https://blurt.blog/@nalexadre/rivnp6
In these comments @nalexadre indicates that @fervi did not approach Blurt Core with positive and accommodating communication, but rather than producing the code put up a roadblock saying Blurt Core should audit the front end, @fervi after the fact did release the code eventually and @nalexadre did find some risks, here are key points from @nalexadre's comments:
If the goal is just to send the keys by email (which I don't really recommend) so that the person creating the account doesn't see them, I personally would not have done it this way. I would have rather made a second page where the beneficiary of this new account can change his keys, allowing me to stay only on the communication with the blockchain without the need for a backend
I saw that IP and emails are hashed and stored in a database to check the abusive use of the service, you could even add the mobile phone number it would remain easily bypassable (so easy to find an email or SMS number ephemeral on the web). Protecting against abuse of the service is very hard and time-consuming but you're right to try, it's the best way to learn.
I have a hard time understanding the problem that there was about making the project open-source via a git repo from the beginning and understand perfectly well that a reply asking the interlocutor to go and see the source code of the page could be seen as extremely unprofessional and a suspect reaction personally I would have had the same.
-After internal discussion I informed @fervi of the vote results, to which he asked for the names of the witnesses who voted 18/1, I indicated this would be a breach of privacy and would rather post the results and request witnesses to verify in comment, this again shows @fervi does not respect privacy and as such should not have an app endorsed that puts him in a custody position of private keys and emails.
-Before I could write this post @fervi had already posted my screenshot on both Hive and Blurt without my consent which I indicated I would post and he again seems to be fixated on witness names instead of accepting the outcome of the vote. https://hive.blog/blurt/@fervi/oops, https://blurt.blog/blurt/@fervi/oops.
My message in Discord DM to Fervi today:
after much deliberation witnesses have voted on your reinstatement, these are the results:
You will still have access to public areas of Discord and to the Public witness channel so you get all updates and notices
Hey, how you doing?
What's new with you? We haven't talked for a long time.)
Have a good mood.
Hi, thanks for the message. i'm well and hope things are good with you?I Have been actively testing the Blurt mobile app, your reply actually highlighted to me that the app needs notifications of unread replied cause I only saw this 2 days later, so thank you.
if you have a chance check https:://pwa.blurt.blog check out the surprise animation when you vote a post, it's so satisfying! :)
There is also a chat function in the app menu, the only thing that doesn’t work is posting and commenting, but those should be fixed this week.
keep safe!
Sir please vote my post and support me too🌻🌻💐
I am happy and so much admire the fact that you often handle such issues with such maturity; You are simply a leader. @fervi might just need to respect the witness' decision and be ready to take responsibility for his actions. People should follow the laid out guidlines and allow peace reign. You can be sure that there is no smooth road to success and for Blurt to succeed we all will have to see this kind of behaviours which I consider as attacks on the Blurt. Keep doing your best.
I was also talking to a friend from Rwanda and I asked him to consider joining Blurt and even recruit people into it. I am waiting for his response which I will also communicate to you. We need to promote blurt to the widest possible audience around the Globe, that might help.
If there were security concerns about the inclusion of an app in the basic Blurt account creation, wouldn't it have been advisable to make these concerns available to the wider community - beyond Discord communication - in the form of purely technical language, so that the focus is first on this important aspect of security, rather than on the disputes?
If someone is absolutely convinced that he has launched a good product, I think it it wise to discuss the weak points of the product on the technical level alone and to publish the concerns as you have listed them now, but not additionally the internal quarrels.
If someone doesn't accept that his product raises safety issues, then these concerns need to be discussed until they are recognised. If this has not been achieved via the internal Discord server - and that is now the case here - the only way to get voices not yet heard from the community is via public posting. Which fervi has done. Now it is important that both you, the witnesses, and fervi are open to voices who preferably understand the technical aspects involved. Who refrain from emotional reaction regarding the way the communication has been done so far.
From my perspective, there is no point at all in discrediting fervi or making him out to be unreasonable (even if he is or would be), because by doing so you will only succeed in further hardening the fronts. You will not succeed in serving your interest in advancing Blurt in this way, I think.
I don't think you are appeasing him with this, rather the opposite. Excluding him from the internal witness channel is counterproductive, not productive - is, how I see it.
To the extent that you or the other witnesses feel unable to discuss fervi's proposed app in purely factual technical terms (and regardless of whether fervi feels capable of doing so), it would have been good to have made a vote regarding the acceptance/non-acceptance of the app idea among you witnesses and NOT a vote on the person of fervi. To make such a vote on the idea and not the person, you would have generated clarity on the technical issues (e.g. providing the source code etc.) in the first place, I guess.
As I understand fervi, please correct me if it is wrong, his concern is
I once had a long conversation with one of the witnesses on Steemit about this and the told me
the only sure way to prevent multiple accounts from a single user would be to register by ID card or ID number.
In all likelihood, this would be a form of personal authentification that no one would agree to.
I think, the costs are a lesser matter, though it could also be answered by the community.
Accordingly, it is probably a matter of trust in the operators of the blockchain/the witnesses as to how secure the user accounts and the storage of sensitive data are perceived to be. So it all boils down to who the community trusts more with regard to the opposing groups and their spokespeople.
fervi is listed as witness, so it does not make sense to exclude him from internal communication, from my point of view.
Does it mean, he only gets access to what is being decided by the other witnesses, meaning the end results of any technical maintainances and works? This runs contrary to what the community voted on, or does it not? From the official side of the matter can you exclude a witness from internal communication before not the community on the whole took their witness votes away? But I can be wrong on that. I am not sure how to understand the witness vote share ratio altogether.
how exactly is "multi-accounting" a "problem" ?
Is it not?
it doesn't matter how many accounts someone controls
it only matters how much stake they wield
You haven't referred to this part yet. I'm interested in what you have to say about it.
Aren't those who are involved in politics here also involved in the tedious research of who actually owns which account? And don't the disputes also revolve around the fact that the accounts with high stakes or BP do not disclose that they belong to the founding team, for example? People seem to think that under business conduct such disclosure is needed so that one knows what power who is endowed with here in order to get a realistic impression of how business is done here. So I think the maintenance of multiple accounts is confusing if only because who am I going to make an agreement with? I know you can't not have the option of multiple accounts, however, I would like it if users acknowledged their multiple accounts, like some sort of disclaimer under their blogs or in the header for example.
https://blurtlatam.com/@don-t/rjre7t
since the blockchain is transparent
everyone can see where the funds came from
Not necessarily. One can transfer tokens for example from Ionomy to any account they wish and that account has no way of knowing where they originated from, nor anyone else. All one would see is it came from Ionomy.
yes, there are ways to mask where your funds came from
but most of the time it's cheaper and easier to transfer directly
sometimes it's as easy to spot as a large delegation
and if they're also voting for the same witnesses on both accounts, that could also be a clue
How do you find out who's accounts are owed by whom? I don't find that easy.
here are a couple of "block-explorers"
https://ecosynthesizer.com/blurt/richlist
https://blurtblock.herokuapp.com/logiczombie/
@rycharde - is there some tool that you know of that can show if the majority of funds in a blurt account came directly from another blurt account ?
Not sure I see it that way. So you're saying it doesn't matter if someone has one account or twenty? How can someone else who only has one account be sure they are talking to the same person? From your point of view, don't you need to know? Don't I need to know that if you're not commenting with me with your logiczombie account, you're you? I find that exceedingly strange. It may not be so dramatic if we don't want to do business with each other, but how am I supposed to do business with someone if that someone has nineteen other accounts besides the one and wants to influence me and my decisions with these other user names, for example? It could be that I come to appreciate logiczombie personally, or the other way around, that something is interfering with our relationship and I want to stop doing business with him. But now one of his other user accounts comes along and pretends that we don't know each other. That can happen, can't it?
Doesn't farming also fall under this multiple user account aspect?
what do you mean by "farming" ?
I use your quote. I think, I've heard the term "farming" for creating a bot army and running accounts fully automated, without any specifically human effort further on. Combined with a text-creating AI and an automatic picture generator you could publish blogs on and on and just need to look them up once in a while to comment here and there nicely. LOL
i still don't see the "advantage" to this
I'll come back to you, going to bed now. Too tired.
please explain to me the advantage of someone controlling 2,000 accounts ?
their witness vote is unaffected
their revenue from voting is actually DECREASED because of the per-vote-fees associated with blurt
and as far as someone masquerading as other users,
there is no way to prevent this
it happens on discord and facebook and rumble and youtube and everywhere
although, someone could build a pattern matcher, to identify speech-patterns and cross-account token contamination - but it still wouldn't catch every example
over on hive, @logic and @steemcleaners are both controlled by the same user, but they use @steemcleaners to downvote people so nobody can retaliate against their main account - - the same account also controls @hivewatcherhelper on the "official" @hivewatchers discord
this is a good example of why people might want multiple accounts
but, it's important to remember that it has zero effect on their witness vote and it does not give them any financial advantage when voting
But as it is evident. No one can prevent that.
right, and it's dangerous to pretend it's a "problem"
Cool, you have ripped apart that argument. I am happy that it does not live with me any longer. If no one else objects, I shall never have to use it again :) (at least when it comes to politics/governance of the chain) THX!
Other than that, I still find it somewhat creepy not to know if one person, I already got to know by one user-name, approaches me incognito with one I do not know.
"The Prisoner" Episode 13 explores the classical problem of identity - probably the best episode
In Lak’ech Ala K’in
We were approached in DM on Discord, more specifically I was approached in DM so kept yje conversation where it started. The request was to add the app to the official signup page, to which we countered with questions and the source code was not forthcoming as mentioned.
We were told to audit the frontend instead of working within the parameters of our request. Before we even had time to discuss that (or even take it to the witnesses or make discussion public) fervi was already posting on Hive defamatory posts with war narrative. So you see there was no time to do as you suggest as we are not dealing with rational and professional conduct here.
Due to the conduct exhibited and due to the repeated hostile comments and narratives from ctime and the close association between ctime and fervi there is no way we can ever endorse any app created by fervi as safe for community consumption even from just an alterate agenda perspective, sadly his bridges are officially burnt.
I see it differently. It is always time to ignore aggressive publications or publications perceived as such and to refer instead to the technical and security aspects alone. You could also have reacted in the way of asking for the source code again after this was answered as "not necessary", with the plausible argument that if there were security concerns, one can best check this if one knows the source code. Sure, that can be annoying when someone doesn't come right out with it. But now he has made the code available, hasn't he?
No matter what fervi has published during this time. If you don't want war and broken bridges yourself, you can safely ignore provocation. It would have been easy for the witnesses who have the technical know-how to discuss your above list with fervi in a blog post, if it doesn't work in Discord, and then to debate the corresponding technical aspects together with fervi. Presumably one or the other savvy techie (without being a witness) would have contributed to this as well (as has happened now).
All that would have been needed was a list of questions A,B,C,D, which would have been worked through in order. Instead you added to your list the relationship between ctime and fervi, which I really don't particularly understand. why you did that. If you can't negotiate with ctime, you can't structure arguments that are exclusively technical and factual, then you seem to want to have or escalate the dispute?
Can you go along that it might look like that if you step out of your own perspective?
I also mentioned that there is no possibility of absolute security when registering accounts (in order to prevent someone from maintaining many accounts on their own), so couldn't that also have been an argument that could have been given to fervi?
It is beyond me how in communication simply question A, answer to question A and reference to question A etc. cannot take place.
As unpalatable and unwise as posting on Blurt and Hive may have been, it has still led to very intelligent comments where some of the commenters have been in interesting and technically savvy conversation with each other and with fervi.
It is therefore an advantage when someone gets upset because it often only becomes obvious what was lacking.
One thing you can be sure of is what the readership always registers (whether consciously or unconsciously). It is active questions that remain unanswered. This gives the individual who ignores questions a good or less good reputation.
If there is conflict, then you can use the potential of it instead of giving up on communication altogether, is how I see it.
Blurt Core has a self-appointed responsibility to make decisions to keep users safe, there are many incidents where users entered keys into apps on Steem and later were used to "hack" their accounts on Steem, Hive and Blurt, app operators can go rogue and become a long term danger to the user that trusted them with info, in this case @fervi has shown really poor judgement and behaviour right from the get-go, so there is no beating around the bush we simply do not feel it safe to endorse anything from him at this point, it would be fine if another trusted witness takes his code and operates it, if the goal is just to get the account creation app into play, but with @fervi operating it, no chance of approval.
If the goal is just free account creation, that is being done by request on discord and the new mobile app to be released a month from now will have free account creation.
If that is the case and you lost your trust, there is nothing I would further debate with you. I just commented shortly on fervi, leaving it with questions:
https://blurt.blog/witness-update/@erh.germany/rj0exr
Good to know.
Just admit that you hate me and that's it. You don't need to add ideology to your creation of FUD
Nobody hates you, we just hate dumb communication, which you seem to excel in. Now im at "war" with you....not. lol...you screwed up and turned everyone against, losing all trust aa you went on the attack putting people on the defensive. All you had yo do was show some patience or just come to me. I would have helped you get things approved.
Lol, I'm the one making baseless accusations and wanting to remove users from the blockchain?
No side is perfect....if you want to hold gruges and NOT move forward, you are doing an excellent job. Im here trying to work with people and work things out for the good of the platform.
The team and I are happy building, and then we see FUD war posts from your side, so I would analyse carefully where the FUD started.
And where did this fud come in? Didn't you create it? Wanting to play god?
I act in accordance to a responsibility to the community, the god narrative is something your side distorts, @worldtravelpro and @outofthematrix have once believed this too, but I think they have seen who I really am and it is not what you try frame me as.
I don't hate anyone, I strongly dislike and distrust behaviours such as the one you exhibit and your association with ctime who cannot and will not speak in a constructive manner, but only tries to subvert. I think you isolated yourself by siding with ctime.
Well. Now write again what was wrong with projects like BlurtCreator that you claim was unsafe.
You can say what you want. You don't do it for security, but for your own money.
Trust is a mutual matter. If two discussants have lost each other's trust, the only solution is for both to express the will to restore it. But if neither of them wants to do that, there is no need for any further debate. So why do you comment on each other?
How for our own money? Please show the money flow on the blockchain, everything is transparent. Stop pushing false narratives, the Blurt Core members sacrifice tons of time for very low pay that they mostly leave powered up anyway.
There is nothing wrong with the Blurt creator project, we endorse free account creation apps, as mentioned we will be including a free account creator in the upcoming mobile app, the problem is you are difficult to trust as operator, we would add this app no problem to the sign-up page if it was operated by any other technically adept and trusted witnesses or devs.
If you had kept yourself in check and remained professional your outlook would have been much different, imagine you submitted a request to a superstore for your product to be displayed on their shelves, before they even have time to evaluate it you start posting negative things about their store, do you really think your product would get approved?
you don't need "trust" when you have OPEN-SOURCE-CODE
Actually, you do, open source is auditable at spot and mostly indicative, there is nothing stopping the operator using a different binary when deploying the app.
well, i guess you could deploy it yourself
sort of a scientific peer-review
If we test and deploy ourselves we would happily include in the signup page, we would even give full credit to fervi as the developer if he wishes this I can discuss with the team.
phenomenal idea
tagg @fervi
We might just need to change it to require google authenticator or some other method, which we will discuss as we don't wish to collect user emails.
In my eyes this is a bad sign from your side again, if @fervi isn´t stupid and I guess he isn´t he will count one and one together for the 18n votes against him (might be the rest of the top 20) what shows or indicates to me that these guys are mostly agreeing with your oppinion regardless what they maybe really think !
Is this the kind of modell you like to burn in the BLURT-CHAIN @megadrive to save your and the foundations souls ?
I read a lot of comments made by @logiczombie and I guess he stated also that it is the clever way to always held open the channel for talks, but here you have closed the door with your arguments, and I stated that some times before:
that´s not kind of a wise decission from one who leads a group of people/business/company/or even a blockchain community.
Regarding the code, is the complete code of Blurt including the frontends and the programms what is running behind opensource or did all the witnesses are able to inspect it ???
If not how can you claim to get this from @fervi if on the other hand side it isn´t hanled the same way ?
And to close this statement I also agree with most of the points @erh.germany made in his comment, sometimes its better hear on a broader audiance ;)
No, they are just pissed off, that somebody leaks the private witness channel, because they are sticking to the rules.. And he is behaving like a DH... End of story...
For the record : I didn't take part in that vote!!!
anyway, but they also have their reasons to be pissed off of something, such kind of negative evolution in communication doen not come out of thin air.
Sometimes you have to shake hands with shit on them to come out of such situations, or did you think working with hedgefond managers the whole day is always smiling and having good times -forget about it- it was nearly every day a war about the money from them the unreached milestones and so on less than 5% days in a year when we had the mood to party ;)
There must be a way to end this desaster soon and focus on what brings BLURT back on track !
government transparency
never forget julian assange
Yes, I understand your point... BUT:
Imagine running the private witness channel publicly onb Blurt i.e.:
Every single comment of every witness would be torn apart by dozens of Blurtarians...
It would be pure chaos!!!!!
I remember, the dumbest/funniest thing I ever threw in, was that they should give @saboin 5K a month, so he can work Blurt fulltime...
I remember @megadrive answering, that the community would lynch us!!!!
A heap of ROFL smileys followed from the other witnesses....
Well, I thought it was funny!!!! 😂😂😂😂
Please, tear apart! 😂😂😂😂
personally, i think it's very important for everyone to know if and when any of the top witnesses even hints at freezing and or zeroing out any account
His Blurt account wasn't touched... The private Discord channel for Blurt witnesses has admins and super admins, that make the rules there... THEIR RULES! (It's their channel!!!) Nobody HAS TO BE in that chat... We are all in there by free will...
If someone FxsUp in there, everybody is being asked!!!! That is even more democracy, than they would have to! They could skip that and throw him out directly....
@worldtravelpro @outofthematrix can you comment based on your purview of the witness channel whether witnesses are acting independently and making their own assumptions of @fervi or if you think they are just following Blurt Core opinion?
I have called on these two witnesses because they are the most neutral, and formerly were at odds with me, so will have the most unbias opinion.
https://blurtlatam.com/@outofthematrix/rj0ca0
Basically @fervi has proven himself uncooperative, not a team player, gone on the attack on hive referencing "war" several times, leaked screen shots from private witness chats to further incite division......and there for he is not trust worthy....end of story. He made his bed now he can lay in it. Just how it is, he can complain until he s blue in the face. I could care less at this point.
In fact im totally impressed with the independant thinking going on in the witness chat. Even core people like @rycharde and @megadrive just yesterday were sharing totally contradictong ideas regarding a certain matter, but they speak friendly and respectfully, so it s just no big deal. So much of this negative nerrative comes from pure assumption combined with a heafty dose of negative thinking.
Confirmed buddy!!!
Congratulations, your post has been curated by @techclub
Manually curated by
@samhenrytenplus
This is a ... True ❤️... I always respect you and your team member thank you so much for handling this situation.
Sure, but as a witness you depend on the Blurt Foundation. And BF, despite Megadrive's assumption that it would be disbanded over time, is going the opposite way and further cementing the project.
You can say - This BlurtCreator is cool, but it's a new project, it will be added in time. Except it's not - the project is a couple of months old and has been submitted a couple of times to be added to Blurt's DApps and has always been rejected on any pretext. Just like other projects.
Do you think why Megadrive created its post FUD? So that people would be afraid to create accounts for free and pay him. I don't know if you know (you probably do), but it is possible to create accounts for free on Discord, but there is no information about it available anywhere and if you don't know about it - you will be forced to pay.
Business as usual.
To clarify Blurt Core does not earn anything from the account creation apps. They are run by the @symbionts team, I don’t expect it is highly profitable, if you pay in Blurt you get the account at near cost, paypal also has processing fees which probably eat up half of the $3 price. Blurt Core is also working on a mobile app which will have free account creation.
The Discord free account method is not published anywhere because we are constantly fending off social attacks and as I have said many times it has set us back on so many things we could have done like post about the Discord account creation, as an example this fervi matter has consumed everyone’s time for three days now, no other productivity happended.
The fact is fervi’s conduct was extremely poor and not fitting for a person in a position of trust (a view supported by 18 witnesses), his association with ctime who continually makes power moves and snubs diplomacy is further problematic from a motive perspective. Sadly fervi will never be trusted by Blurt Core for app endorsement.
My vote for
"X"
👀
It's mean no
I'm just curious why you decided to vote no with this one? Your the only one who voted no so that's why I've got to wonder @nabeeel. 🙏
Result was 18/1 did you see
I'm in 18 :)
Then wouldn't that be a Yes?
I too can confirm the poll. It took place and the votes are as they are!
For the records: I personally did NOT take part in the vote!
Nevertheless, I do NOT understand, neither @fervi's nor @ctime's behaviour!?!?! Do you guys really think, that this is getting you anywhere?!?!?!
Start being more diplomatic and have a bit more patience, then things might start to change around here for you!!!!
Well said....
I very much lean my perspectives and decision making from an investor/pro business perspective. If I was so heavily invested I would be tripping over my own feet to work things out so we can facilitate a better price for everyone.
That's why you're my favorite co-witness my BFAM 🏆🙏
@king1234: Thx 4 your support! 🙏🍀🌞
I can confirm the result of the result of the poll.
I can confirm that 18 witnesses voted and we had discussion about it.
That shows our witnesses are pretty much active .
Yeah 19 votes, not bad.
Your so genius. That's why you are founder of Blurt. And blurt platform is awesome..
I love this platform
I'm a beginner, I also don't understand what happened
The blog and rewards continue as normal, nothing to worry about there, it's just an internal governance disagreement, don't need to worry too much about it. Basically one of the top witnesses decided to make a defamatory post rather than discussing matters amicably, so we had to remove his Discord private chat role, that's all really.
Show the source code of joinblurt and ecosynthesizer. How is it possible that you approve the 1.5 M BLURT value proposal without asking for the code? Because they are your colleagues? On the other hand you ban witnesses from the chat room just because they ask questions?
So @megadrive says it is open source in gitlab...ok
@fervi did not mention anything about getting the new sign up page in the private discord chat, so I personally and others could not even comment support him or anything.....
He just went straight to a private chat with @megadrive, then compulsively went on the attack before any decision was made or even others knew anything about this.
In fact the top twenty witnesses the other day were suggesting we create an approval system of review from the devs then vote from the witnesses.
But @fervi had to jump the gun, in an incredibly compulsive and passive aggressive way. If just chilled out and discussed things in the witness chat where I and others could support him and make sure he got a fair shake; his page would probably be up and running properly very soon if not already.
Seriously. Foolish passive aggressive communication posted on Hive... vs proper communication in the witness chat.
This basically has nothing to do with the join page he made.
There was no problem just a process. This process did not include posting "war" posts on hive.
All the witnesses saw how this went down in the witness chat that is why there is an overwhelming vote for @fervi no to be included or trusted in regards to the private witness chat. Frankly everyone is shocked that he had like no interest in sharing anything with the rest of us witnesses. That in it's self is a defensive posture against everyone there. How do you work with that?
Like @outofthematrix...I prefer to take a nuetral stance and have not voted either. I'm not into taking sides, but I can't not call out poor foolish communication when I see it. @megadrive's accounting of the situation in this post is correct and it should be recognized as so.
@fervi could have come to me privately to help him get his join page approved.
He could have just spoke to everyone in the private chat.
He could have made a polite post about the process of getting on the blurt.blog page and keep it all public on the blockchain....
But no he decided to jump the gun and compulsively make "war" posts.....on Hive.
Well said senior :)
Look at the openblurt repo on gitlab you will find it, not banned for asking questions, banned for creating external FUD and inciting war (including on Hive), gross misconduct, read my post properly
Well in the first place it is not right that they take away the opportunity of a person to continue in the discord channel of the witnesses, because they removed him, because he got angry, for having a different opinion, really, everyone is supposed to work together and we all have different ways of thinking, you can't always agree with someone's opinion. At last it is a community and we want to develop the platform and not fight, because he is not given the opportunity to see his work, he is proposing a tool to create free accounts and without so many complications for new users in Blurt, I think that instead of be discussing should support it and organize the best tools and developers to bring new features to Blurt. If they don't, when are we going to move forward, when are they going to give other people the opportunity to achieve something important on the platform. In my thoughts it is not good, and they should give it a chance or as many as necessary. Well I hope you can solve your problems, but do it for the good of the community and not just for a few, do it for everyone.
I am in neutral because I understand it, a year ago I wanted to put a witness for Blurt, I asked for help and nobody helped me to configure it, but we are supposed to be a community.
I hope they solve the problems for the good of the community and that it is no longer divided. Add more exchanges.
Well at least, I hope they see my project with good eyes @team-mexico, and from time to time help is needed. Greetings, nice night.
Bueno en primer lugar no está bien que le quiten la oportunidad a una persona de seguir en el canal de discord de los testigos, porque lo sacaron , porque se enojo, por tener una opinión diferente, de verdad, se supone que todos trabajan en conjunto y todos tenemos diferentes formas de pensar, no siempre puedes estar de acuerdo con la opinión de alguien. Al fin es una comunidad y queremos desarrollar la plataforma y no pelear, porque no se le da la oportunidad de ver su trabajo, el esta proponiendo una herramienta para crear cuentas gratuitas y sin tantas complicaciones para usuarios nuevos en Blurt, pienso que en vez de estar discutiendo deberian de apoyarlo y organizar las mejores herramientas y desarrolladores para traer nuevas características a Blurt. Si no lo hacen, cuando vamos avanzar, cuando le van a dar a otras personas la oportunidad de lograr algo importante en la plataforma.
En mi pensamiento no esta bien, y deberian darle una oportunidad o las que sean necesarias. Bueno espero que puedan solucionar sus problemas, pero haganlo por el bien de la comunidad y no solo por unos cuantos, háganlo por todos.
Yo estoy en neutral porque lo entiendo, hace un año quise poner un testigo para Blurt, pedi ayuda y nadie me ayudo a configurarlo, pero se supone que somos una comunidad.
Espero solucionen los problemas por el bien de la comunidad y que ya no se divida mas. Sumen mas intercambios.
Bueno al menos espero que vean con buenos ojos mi proyecto @team-mexico, y de vez en cuando se necesita ayuda. Saludos, linda noche.
Blurt to the mooon. 🔥🤬🦾🚀
See my comment above. We were all trying to workout a process to get it approved...but this dev decided to go on the attack before we even had the chance. It's hard to work with people when they don't even give you a chance.
Sir, you are great. Your work and the blurt you develop so neatly and beautifully is admirable and very effective. I joined this blurt platform a few days ago and the people here are very nice and within a few days I have gained everyone's love and respect. Thanks to the blurt platform and I must say that in general the burt community I know is very nice, and the interactions were within the framework of respect.
Los witness realizaron un consenso para aprobar
Can confirm. Best image I can provide, this comment operation itself is also signed with the valid posting key of this account.
For my part I didn't live the background of this story leading to this decision, even if I studied the case, recognize that the behavior that @fervi has had in public several times is a serious fault as a witness as well as the lack of confidentiality involved in accessing the private channel of witnesses via leaks, and had an interesting discussion with him yesterday, I preferred to abstain from voting.
Everyone voted according to their own conscience and I recognize the result of this 18/1 vote as the correct official result and I respect it.
My door is not closed and I would be happy to exchange about dev, tech, etc... on the dev channel of the Blurt discord with you and/or in comments in your future posts.
As I wrote yesterday you don't have to fight with the Blurt Foundation, Instead, fight to show your abilities with the dev of autonomous tools that will benefit the community, it's more constructive. A lot of interesting dev can be made on Blurt without the need of anyone.
Due to your high-ranked position in the top 20, I hope to see impeccable behavior from you in the future as a representative of a part of the Blurt community. It's possible to be in total disagreement with people while keeping an audible and professional speech.
Being a witness of the top 20 is not only a title and reward, it's also duties and a great responsibility due to a position as an ambassador of Blurt.
And when it does not go well and you want your message to be audible do not do it in the moment, let it rest to have a clear, consistent, respectful, and professional speech if you want to be considered as such, remember credibility is the key to success.
Regards,
@nalexadre
Sure, but as a witness you depend on the Blurt Foundation. And BF, despite Megadrive's assumption that it would be disbanded over time, is going the opposite way and further cementing the project.
You can say - This BlurtCreator is cool, but it's a new project, it will be added in time. Except it's not - the project is a couple of months old and has been submitted a couple of times to be added to Blurt's DApps and has always been rejected on any pretext. Just like other projects.
Do you think why Megadrive created its post FUD? So that people would be afraid to create accounts for free and pay him. I don't know if you know (you probably do), but it is possible to create accounts for free on Discord, but there is no information about it available anywhere and if you don't know about it - you will be forced to pay.
Business as usual
Do you mean to be in the top 20? If you have read my post from a few days ago you could read that I talk about 10,000 onboarded people with 1,000 Blurt Power ($5.811 at today's price).
This is a picture representing for me the long-term goal, hundreds of thousands of small wallets rather than a few big investors, because there is nothing stronger than to be recognized by a community rather than an individual, just 100,000 people (10% of the monthly unique visitor of Peakd) with 1,000 BP it's 100,000,000, BLURT it mean enough to make a great decentralization ;)
If you want to prove them they're wrong, fork the Condenser, make it better than any that already exists with exceptional SEO, don't let anyone tell you how to do it by offering to fund you (stay free of influence), and put your tool on it.
I have a hard time understanding why on Blurt everyone focuses on the official site for anything and everything, your account is old enough to have known eSteem, Busy, SteemPeak, Appics then Peakd, Ecency, Leofinance, Liketu (and I won't mention them all) none of them needed the official site to exist.
Yes, I know, never use it so I don't really know the full process (I prefer to create the key myself and make directly the transaction with the blockchain itself).
As already said @megadrive had the position he was asked to have in view of his responsibilities and the information he had in his possession at the time of the facts from what I have learned from my study of this case. There were clearly communication problems between you that should never have existed at the level of professionalism and rules to respect in the process that such a request engenders (I won't go back over everything I already said, just the open-source repo is for me a sufficient reason for a refusal). Communication is something fragile, breaking it is easy, and repairing it is long and tedious.
I sincerely hope that in a few months this story will be behind us, that you will have beautiful things that you have developed to show us, and that you will feel fulfilled on Blurt
Well said. Really, there needs to be a new front end just for Fervi and company....and I'd be rooting for it big time! I like these guys ideas. Basically I side almost always with @ctime and MK, lucylin too for that matter in regards to ideas and direction of the platform....but the avenue they've taken to get their ideas implemented has been incredibly counter productive in general.
I can confirm that the results were 18:1. I just checked a few seconds ago and it is still the same.
There are times when working with people is much more complicated and difficult than quantum physics or frontier physics.
There is always the risk of encountering stubborn haters. But I must say that in general the Burt community that I know is very nice, and the interactions have been within the framework of respect.
Very good to hear. I totally agree.