Thanks for replying.

And apologies if I haven't understood all the finer details of how the steem ecosystem works. My understanding was that witnesses decide if they will upgrade to a new update or not? So in a way they can veto updates? 

My concern is that people like @haejin don't care about the platform, they are short term money makers. If they leave dust and ruin in their wake. They will not care.

I would love to see STEEM have the same market value as Facebook, but if the whole reward pool can be so easily manipulated by 3 people, it leaves it open to abuse.

Hopefully you can understand my point of view not as a witness, but also as a fellow user of the platform.

@kabir88

The problem is that they might not realize that. What if they think they are doing the right thing? You can do harm to yourself all the while being convinced that you are doing the right thing, simply for lack of knowledge.

Highly staked users here have not necessarily been selected for their ability to make decisions at this juncture in the development of steem - the decisions required now are different from those that were required when the network was only getting started and bugs needed to be ironed out in the software.

Now we are mostly into an area where decisions should be informed by economics, game theory and sociology rather than knowledge about programming languages and blockchain software design. Yet the high staked users are mostly knowledgeable about the latter, not about the former.

And relying on the fact that they are going to notice their decisions are not good, well, good luck with that ! We humans have a propensity toward avoiding the link between our decisions and negative outcomes. It's always someone else's fault.