The Freedom To Fight For What You Love

2019-03-15T02:29:37.000Z Honest Cash

Minglechain is like a platonic Tinder for crypto people. We've been discussing relevant concepts, here's my latest response

*****************************************************

I’m not convinced that one should have to stake crypto in order to prove interest, and on Honest Cash I feel that’s a contentious issue to upvote personal posts as to me, it may undermine the idea of a meritocratic system. - Minglechain

Clearly you appreciate your freedom to spend your time to promote things that are important to you, in this case Minglechain (MC). But what about your freedom to spend your money to promote MC?

Right now nothing technically prevents you from creating an account for MC on HC and spending your money on conrad_murkins’ story about MC. The problem is, if you did this, the money wouldn’t go into HC’s wallet.

Here’s my latest tweet. I spent $50 bucks in order to help this tweet about HC reach a much wider audience. Well, I also spent the money to help facilitate our discussion.

According to your perspective, as I understand it, everybody but the founder of HC, Adrian Barwicki, should have the freedom to spend their money to promote HC. But what is the benefit of preventing the one person who, in theory, cares the most about HC from spending his money to help it to reach a much wider audience?

On Twitter I’m the only one who has the freedom to spend money to promote my content. On HC I’m the only who doesn’t have the freedom to spend money to promote my content.

It’s absurd. And ridiculous. And incredibly detrimental.

Imagine it in terms of a child drowning…

Twitter: only the child’s parents can rescue the child

HC: everybody but the child’s parents can rescue the child

Or, if you prefer, think of it terms of education…

Twitter: only the child’s parents can pay for the child’s schooling

HC: everybody but the child’s parents can pay for the child’s schooling

Check out this tweet. The problem was infighting? No, the problem was a lack of communication. The springbok (?) in the foreground spotted the lion very early on, but they failed to transmit their essential information to the two springbok engaged in combat.

We all have limited perspectives, but they aren’t equally limited, given that everybody’s perspective is different. This is why correctly grasping the biggest possible picture depends on facilitating the optimum communication among the maximum number of individuals.

Here you are listening to my feedback on MC. But do you think that Jack listens to my feedback about Twitter? Do you think that he got my message that my preference is to use Paypal to pay for advertising?

I’m sure that he got the message that plenty of people aren’t happy about censorship on Twitter. But you shouldn’t need a large crowd to inform you that there’s a problem. Also, counting the number of people adversely affected by something doesn’t at all reveal the size of the problem.

If Twitter was a market, or a much better market, then all the users could easily use their money to transmit their most essential information to Twitter and to each other. Far fewer people would be eaten by lions. Far fewer children would drown. For more children would have their education paid for.

Unfortunately for humanity, Twitter isn’t a much better market. Fortunately for humanity, HC is, but it certainly has lots of room for improvement.

MC obviously doesn’t need to be a market in order to be useful to humanity. But in order for MC to be maximally useful to humanity… it definitely has to be market. Plus, this is the only way for MC to avoid being quickly replaced by some other startup.

*****************************************************

See also: Honest Cash's #1 Priority?

Responses