Hi Ned, adding my 2c here for questions you might be interested in considering.

TLDR questions in case you feel like considering directly, discussion below them:

1. Can you clarify why you do not now think that censorship resistance is a "must have" feature?
2. Would you support any hardfork which removed some or all of the built in censorship resistance?
3. Can you discuss why you think the rewards are not now currently "fair"? i.e. sure the market decides it, which is de facto valuation and thus fair.
4. Do you see the point that quality is explicably derived from the interface which presents the content? (this is distinct from value, see discussion below)
5. Do you think it is wise to get involved with another company to do Destiny when you are Steemit CEO? Are you planning on handing the CEO position over, perhaps to @andrarchy ?
6. Does Steemit Inc. have a board and if so what is their involvement in decision making?

As I said [recently](https://steemit.com/steemit/@personz/the-regret-filled-pivot-or-how-steemit-learned-to-relax-and-discard-their-designs), it was strange to hear you say that you have never considered fair rewards and censorship resistance essential parts of the chain.

Specifically related to censorship, soon after the launch of the platform you appeared on #Blocktalk here saying that it is a core feature:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkQ7b-u8_6g

At 3:16 you say

> One of the advantages of Steemit is that it's uncensorable, so if a post goes up to the blockchain it says on the blockchain, so you can't have censorship, you don't have moderation in the same way [...]

Regarding fair rewards, I can say that yes, "fairness" is the eye of the beholder, but that the n^1 reward curve, while a good intentioned move, greatly reduced the fairness of Steem rewards. It's clear that the idea rests of this and that's why [I argued the case strongly](https://steemit.com/steem/@personz/argument-against-completely-proportionally-linear-effective-voting-steem-power), and said this [some time ago](https://steemit.com/steem/@personz/in-defense-of-finding-value-on-steem):

> Value is fundamental to the Steem blockchain, whereas Quality is a function of the interface.

That is, things are going to be valued according to a wide variety of metrics, and if you go for pure market theory then that includes metrics that no one person even fully knows, and which the valuers may also not be consciously aware of. _Quality_ is only one such metric, and it is heavily dependent on well made modern interfaces, which are functional and delightful.

You should read @greer184 's recent post [Feel free to disagree](https://steemit.com/zero/@greer184/feel-free-to-disagree) in which he argues that the stated aims (as stated in the whitepaper) can only work if STEEM price goes to $0, thereby removing speculators from the market and making STEEM and thus SP a purely internally functional token. This boils down to the claim that speculators and market trading _work against the token functioning as an indicator of quality_.

I had more to say about SMTs but since you [latest pinned post](https://steemit.com/steemit/@ned/rocksdb-and-smts-announcement) (how does that work by the way?) you say it's going to happen in lite form. I would echo @rycharde 's point though in his [recent post](https://steemit.com/bitshares/@rycharde/ready-made-steem-smt-dex-bitshares) saying that without a DEX it's no better than Bitshares, so why do it / why not sure Bitshares?