Well @sarahspeaks144, I am glad you are here and appreciate having made your acquaintance. I too found this site quite by accident and am now hooked. Your explanation makes a lot of sense.
I had to laugh when you explained your shock at giving a negative vote because I had the EXACT same reaction (minus the not voting any more part). It is actually quite easy to explain.
The content you see when looking at the screen is held in your computer memory after it is downloaded from wherever it comes from. So when your browser downloaded the page, the value you saw was what the author would have likely earned (what shows is an ESTIMATED VALUE) at the current value of Steem. While you were reading the page and eventually decide to give an up-vote, the price of Steem went down or more funds were drained from the reward pool (or both) and the blockchain did its calculations and decided that the original estimate was no longer valid and revised its estimate. When you clicked that button it sends a signal that changes what the page should display (the up-vote button turns blue). At that time, the browser must fetch the revised information from its source, and guess what? There is a new estimated account value along with the blue button colour! It is quite usual to see a reduction in actual pay-out just before the pay-out comes due because others are draining the reward pool and the total amount to be divided up is less than when the original estimate was made.
As for the big jump in value: If you look at the number of votes cast, you will see that you were NOT the only one to have voted in the time between when the browser downloaded the information and the time you clicked. That voter number will also have jumped up.
I wouldn't consider myself a technology Luddite, but I had a bit of trouble figuring out what to do on steemitchat, so bravo to you for managing it!
@happyme , your explanation of the fluctuating value of a post at the time of voting was so clear that even I understood it. Amazing! Just now I happened to wander across this YouTube interview with Dan and Ned which you may have watched already. If not, I found it helpful in understanding the meaning of this Facebook-meets-Reddit economic platform. Steemit was only six months old when the host, @dollarvigilante, interviewed Dan and Ned. I cannot grasp how @dollarvigilante earned $12,000 within 12 hours on his first post, but the video is interesting. There is a lingering skepticism at the back of my mind that wage-slaves in the fiat currency paradigm simply become the new wage slaves (called minnows) here. And that is necessarily true because anyone who transfers wealth out of fiat world into Steem "influence" assumes the same relative social position in a different kind of economy. If George Soros purchases $100,000 in Steem "influence" which simultaneously purchases a reputation score of 100, then George Soros enjoys the same degree of power on the blockchain that he exercised in the "global village." ( As the minnows slave away for their morsels, dollars and cents. ) I continue to believe that the primary motive for participating here must be non-monetary. If there is any other motive, that motive will succumb to circumvention, bot influence, and get-rich-quick corruption, just as IRL.
Here's another example: When the sudden influx of new accounts slowed and crashed the system, many applicants waited long periods for account approval. To address this issue, one of the whales who is an attorney IRL offered to "help" new users set up their accounts for a fee of $50. The whale had no unique knowledge about account setup and administration nor did the whale do anything for the $50 fee that any new user could not do independently. Nevertheless, "it happens." And that faux service can be added to the infinite number of profit motive schemes and scams that compromise the concept of anarcho-capitalism and the purity of the principle. But what do I know?
Here's the link:
Oh you are quick!!!! How long have you been on here? Ummmm what was that about Luddite?
I have not seen this video, but it was in fact Mr. Burwick that mentioned Steemit in one of his other videos that a friend of mine gave me a link to that got me curious enough to look into Steem.
1.) You need to consider who were the first ones to find and adopt steem. These were the anarchistic cryptocurrency geeks. So, when he posted his stuff on there, everyone likely resteemed his post and everyone voted on it.
2.) With just a (relatively) few people sharing the reward pool, it was much easier to get high rewards back then.
This is the aspect that some of us are attempting to do something about. There are people who realize this as part of the current system and are actively attempting to curb or in some small way mitigate. Of course there will always be others who use the guise of "helping" minnows to fatten their own wallets, but that is just a fact of life. It is up to each individual to make their own analysis of each situation and decide how they will react to it. Some really don't care about the ethics of what they participate in and care only if they can derive some benefit for themselves, even if the greater benefit is for the person providing the service.
Absolutely! And because of instant power, he could influence witness votes and thus the platform itself. The system is far from perfect.
Seems you know an awful lot for a newbie! Care to assist with the gradual mind-shift that needs to happen for this platform to follow the purity of its principals? You might have some great ideas.
@happyme - Yes, I'm always happy to help. "Gradual mind shift" is just my thing. But I'll have to pace myself and take it slowly for two reasons: 1) I am fighting a war on two fronts in my non-Steemit life and only God's grace has kept me thus far; and 2) I don't yet fully grasp this platform. My brain works by degrees. I did not understand every word that Dan and Ned said in the interview, but I understood a general concept. And I could also see the pitfalls I mentioned in our conversation, pitfalls that Dan and Ned either could not see or would not acknowledge. Now here is another linked interview by the same whale, @dollarvigilante , in which he himself admits that the $12,000 post was simply a paragraph in "Introduce Yourself." He stated his user name and current media platforms, and invited followers. Both he and his guest admit that his "value" to the platform induced the founders and original investors to reward him heavily because a few thousand dollars out of earnings and profits in the millions would not be missed. After the whales were rewarded, that door closed, share price dropped by 75% , and the floodgates opened to admit the minnow pond. The guest also explains that when only a small percentage of Steem is traded, its value is artificially inflated to enrich the coffers of early purchasers. If those buyers sell at the inflated price, they earn huge sums, but Steem value is reduced by the sale. So, according to the critic, the founders created a trading currency out of thin air, then persuaded others to purchase the invented currency with fiat currency or Bitcoin. The actual value of Steem does not exist until it is purchased with an existing currency that gives it value. When you watch the video, you'll be able to tell me if I understood that correctly. So here it is:
I believe you understood the video debate perfectly. Thanks for finding and sharing that video. Obviously you are a careful person and are doing your homework. I have exactly the same concerns. The early adopters will come out way ahead no matter what happens as long as they power down a small portion early. They take out real value and speculate with the remainder, but always stay way ahead of the minions because of the way the system is set up. The longer the platform 'works' the more they stand to gain, so it is still in their best interest to keep it going. However, at some point they may get bored and have so much that it really makes no difference to them any more since that early money has already been invested into other businesses. As the argument went... nobody knows how it will go. It is a social experiment and can go either way.
Many people take the view of Jeff who are in it for the excitement and for fun. If it succeeds, great. If it doesn't, there was no real loss. They don't care what anyone else makes.
Others are active traders who trade constantly and have invested their own funds, but because of the volatility of cryptocurrencies in general, they can buy and sell even several times per day and earn a bit on each trade. Once they break even, they can take a loss without actually losing anything of their own. From that point on, anything they gain is pure profit.
Then there are the unqualified investors who are caught up by the hype and the frustration of low earnings so they buy in to increase their VP and hope to earn ever greater rewards. These are the REAL backbone of the platform and the buyers of what the early adopters are selling. These are the people who literally buy the risk that was mentioned in the video. THEY are the ones who the average user SHOULD be supporting and idolizing.
Come join my contests and games and support the new witness that is supporting me. You will earn a few pennies while having fun and at the same time be part of a movement to slowly transform the direction of the platform. There is power in numbers! We need to build those numbers.
@happyme - (Trying this again, first reply disappeared somewhere in the ecosystem.) Here's what I love about you. You always "get it," you understand the issues, and you don't miss a trick. I've just recommended you in a two-month-old conversation between @valued-customer and @igster,
"RE: STEEM is starting to seem about as scalable as the Earth. (not good)." When you have time, read their comments and replies. Excellent discussion.
I almost entered your pick-a-number contest (111-666), but as a Biblical Christian activist, those numbers sent a shiver very similar to the discovery that one of my followers is "Beelzebub" (which "caused a disruption in my serotonin reuptake inhibitors"). Then I discovered that "Beelzebub" is the alter-avatar of my adopted mentor, @carlgnash , who is one of the most generous and helpful Steemians in the community. Just goes to show ya!
Thanks for the mention! It really means a lot to me when someone as intelligent as you would recommend me. You obviously do your homework and get to the nitty gritty of topics, so when you make a comment it is not just some flaky thing off the top of your head.
Igster responded to your assumption of voting power so I don't need to repeat it. The different keys are just a security measure and don't have anything to do with power. You should always log in with the lowest-access key for your needs: in other words ONLY use your posting key for daily use. Enter your active key ONLY when you want to vote for a witness or move some money (un-check the "keep me logged in" check-box when using that key). Use your master key ONLY for account recovery.
666 is the mark of the Devil, but the others? They should all be fine, shouldn't they?
As for your mentor (I was wondering how you got as much rep. as you have in such a short time); names are just names and people have so many reasons for choosing one. It's difficult to imagine what would entice a person to choose a particular name and unless we ask, we will never really know. Even then we can't be sure they tell the truth or if they even understand completely why they chose the name.
@happyme - See what I mean? You always zero in on the "meat of the matter." I recommended you because the concerns expressed in our conversations echo the concerns expressed in their conversations. A meeting of minds?
Reputation scores are another mystery for me, and my poor mentor had no choice. I adopted him and he's just too kind to refuse. His score is in the 50's like yours and he considers himself an "inquiring mind" I think.
Like you, when I finally started here, I only commented and replied. My very first comment was a reply to Carl's comment having to do with reasons other than earning power that might attract Steemit users. Carl encouraged me to post and I explained that I'm not quite there yet. I didn't tell him that I don't know how to use Markdown. So I just kept wandering about finding matters of interest, posting opinions and asking questions. And usually those writers were already well established. Occasionally, they would reply. I consider @mattclarke my cryptocurrency mentor who has been nudging me along with explanations about "the market." I have frankly admitted to him that I don't understand a word he says but as the information is absorbed, it is re-digested much later (like a cow chewing cud). Matt recently converted a large block of Bitcoin into Steem and now offers SP for lease. Since you are forming "an influence community" to address our concerns, I think that you and Matt should talk.
But I still don't know how the reputation scores are calculated. Once I even saw a quick jump from 31 to 33, skipping 32 altogether. (I felt the same way about skipping first grade. How did this happen?)
But you know, @happyme , there's a tiny little voice whispering in my head saying, "Ignore the score and speak the truth." The little voice is warning me that truth is not popular, nor is the gospel. Flags and downvotes are out there. And the subjects that deeply stir me as a "Biblical Christian activist" are very controversial. So I'm trying to prepare myself to be faithful "in season and out of season." - 2 Timothy 4:2
I'm so glad that we met. Your clarity and energy are inspiring. God bless you.