Steem has a disturbing problem in its platform that demolishes the claim that all members’ content has an equal chance of rising to the top. If you really want to do well on Steem, you must please its board of directors, known as “Steem Whales.”
Normal people like you and I are labeled “Steem Minnows.” If a Minnow wants to make bank with Steemit, he should vet the Whales to learn their likes and dislikes. A Minnow can become rich if he publishes content the Whales like. On the other hand, if the Minnow hurts a Whale’s feelings, the Whale can crush the publisher and drain his earnings.
Although whales are deep divers and usually shy in the wild, Steem Whales don’t hide, so you can meet them here: http://steemwhales.com/. The first 20 whales on the list all have Steam portfolios in excess of $1 million.
Steem’s unfair defect should raise the eyebrows of thousands of activists. Almost all activists have been tortured by censorship at the hands of statist-owned publishing sites like Facebook, Google and YouTube. Steem claims to prohibit censorship and allow the most popular content to rise to the top as it earns the publisher a significant monetary reward. Unfortunately and sadly, that’s not the case. Steem content is heavily censored.
I noticed the unfair glitch in Steem from the beginning. My gift of skepticism that helped me become one of the best undercover narcs in the U.S. continues to help me smell when something’s fishy. After befriending a Steem Whale who chooses to remain anonymous, I learned Whales are the ones who decide if you get an “F” or an “A” on your report card.
How do we know some of the Steem Whales are not cops? I’m positive the CIA has tens of thousands of agents worldwide. We also know through court records they infiltrate and disrupt activist organizations. They have launched massive operations to hinder, collect and stop flows of information. I can’t prove government trolls are or will be Whales, but as an ex-agent, I’m positive that it has happened or is going to happen. This really sucks for me, because I’m famous for being one of law enforcement’s harshest critics. I don’t have much faith in Steemit because all it takes is one “Cop Whale” to keep me from earning money and reaching my audience.
My anonymous Steem Whale friend explained that Whales gain their position by investing or earning $100,000 in Steem. The sizeable buy-in gives Whales so much voting power, they can totally kill your blog by not voting it through. No matter how many Minnow votes you get, one Whale can destroy your earnings with the push of a button.
This unfair use of force recently happened to Dollar Vigilante’s Jeff Berwick, who lost a pile of cash. As you may know, Berwick has been crushing everybody on Steem. Apparently, a certain Whale forgot he wasn’t a fish, and forgot to come up for air. He didn’t surface, but his jealousy did. The killer Whale pompously used his $100,000 elite position to penalize Berwick’s success by down-voting one of his blogs to the loss of $2,000.
I’m a drug expert, not an economics expert, so please double-check my claims. If you are not jealous of money expert Jeff Berwick, he is the one to ask. If you can’t reach Berwick, ask Janet L. Yellen or Alan Greenspan. They are both experts at manipulating cash out of Minnows, so they can probably verify the glitch is real.
I’m not quitting Steem, and neither should you. I am happy to be a publisher on Steemit and I am very grateful to be part of such a cool site and group of Steemers. I am currently running a campaign to invite all my Facebook, YouTube and online fans to follow me on Steem. I’m all in. I’m trying to power up everything I make because the experts predict Steem money will rapidly grow in value. I think it’s one of the best investments a person can make at this moment.
The main reason I’m not quitting Steem is because I learned Steem is able to redesign its system so Whales can’t crush the lowly Minnows. Steem is operated by a group of very intelligent, passionate and sincere people. They want Steemit to be fair and lucrative for their content providers. I have faith they will make the correction, so hang in there with me and let’s see what happens.
In the interest of fairness, allow me to say that most of the Whales are really good people who would never unfairly sabotage one of their members’ wallets. I give a big tip of the hat to that group because they did invest in a great project. It’s sad for the good Whales because it only takes one bad Whale to stink up an entire ocean.
P.S. Please don’t let cops become Whales. Thank you. Amen.
I don't think you're seeing the full picture here, and it was actually multiple "whales" who downvoted that post. I'll give you a vote because I do agree with what you're saying, but again, you're not seeing the full picture.
Want another point of view? Find me in the chat.
Hi @berniesanders, I was actually thinking about something yesterday and it could be part of the full picture of Steemit if we want to take that step back and look at it, as you're suggesting.
Can/will a whale go rogue in the future?
I think it's important to have a realistic view of the future of Steemit and think about all possibilities way ahead so that we are prepared for it (for example maybe the hacking part could have been thought of more thoroughly before it actually happen and have a proactive solution implemented instead of a reactive one, not criticizing, just giving an example, the speed that got sorted out solidified my trust and commidtment in Steemit).
But back to the question. This week someone highlighted that a moderator on the Bitcointalk forum was deleting all posts that had a steemit link on them. ALL posts/comments, not just some of them what were spamming, begging for upvotes etc.
So in light of transparency and independence that are Steem's and Steemit's corner stones : Should we expect one of the current or future whales to be ticked off by a community decision and start going rogue and damage the community members with its power? Downvoting tons of quality posts, affecting the reputations/payouts dipping the market prices etc.
If this is a plausible scenario, should we get ready for it ahead of time and look at implementing some solutions in case it happens? (Maybe muting the voting ability even though that would be censoring and our ecosystem is built against that?)
Or should we just assume that all large SP holders are nice people and will always remain faithful?
PS. I hope I'm not misunderstood. I am fully committed to Steemit, vesting and reinvesting everything. Bernie, you're doing a great job, you've been one of the most active whales I have seen around and I applaud you for that. Many steemers faith has been restored/cemented by your continuous support!
I love when whales downvote an author post then upvote the next one; they show they have no personal grief and are open to the discussion. Also, whales do not always agree, and we see some post that gets whales upvotes and downvotes. It's only at this price that we will have a fair steemit. I made a post on whales vote, and voting habits yesterday. Unfortunately, it gets little traction.
Defiantly not the full picture but very few are aware of the FULL picture. I will check out some of your posts and try and get MORE of the picture. Do you have a post that DOES discuss the FULL picture??? If so let me know and I will be sure to read it. Also I just wrote an article about why I believe Steemit IS REVOLUTIONARY and would love your feedback on it as I have noticed many people respect your opinion.
Thanks
https://steemit.com/revolution/@quinneaker/why-steemit-is-so-important-and-even-revolutionary#@miki/re-quinneaker-why-steemit-is-so-important-and-even-revolutionary-20160813t024032747z
What chat? I want to relentlessly spam you with my blog posts.
steemit.chat
I didn't realize you were on there. I spend quite a bit of my time there. Though unfortunately it is 503'd a the moment.
Are you on the Chat Bernie?
Chat is in the menu on the upper right of the web site.
...
I would like to follow that conversation. Very interested in learning more about your view point on this issue.
The problem you see may be impossible to resolve under the current system, the power to upvote or flag given to large SP holders, a.k.a whales, is the only thing that gives steem value, the only non-speculative use for steem at this point is to power up and be able to influence other`s payouts, so its interesting to see how this issue is also the main value proposition for the steem token.
I think the issue may be able to be dealt with though applying stricter perimeters on the flagging function. I vigorous discussion on the issue is being held here
Thing is, I doubt many people will buy Steem to power up, when they can just buy SP directly through blocktrades.
So I highly doubt this is what gives Steem value.
I would think advantageous interest on SP holdings would suffice to attract people to buy SP - and I would maintain, even more so, than the less tangible value proposition of influencing user interactions on the platform.
When you buy SP at blocktrades you are buying steem and then transfering it to your vest account. So no, you can't buy SP without getting hold of steem first.
Science!
Lots of good content has been written on how STEEM is rapidly becoming more distributed and whales are steadily losing influence. The Steemit platform has been designed to transition from benevolent dictators (Dan, Ned, devs, early miners etc.) smoothly and automatically. I agree with most of what you've said, however, I'm very optimistic the future will be full of benevolent dolphins kicking ass on bad whales. If you catch Dan's most recent posts he's already looking into ways to further distribute voter influence and mitigate bad whale attacks. All good!
for this to happen @johnsmith the rating system needs to change. there is some excellent writing outhere but still earns pennies on the dollar.
I'm also very optimistic and more so after reading everyones comments. Thanks johnsmith. Fist bump.
Though the TDV issues was extremely unfortunate, I agree with your assessment that much is this is due to the growing pains and challenges of equitable distribution of a new currency. We have some very honorable people in the whale ranks and I think they will have this under control until such time that there is a more equitable distribution.
THIS ^^^
PS We are in beta guys, don't "panic" everything will get fixed !
Bravo. I love our passion for this liondani.
Yep.
Love and Peace.
(whale speaking)
You're not a minnow Barry. With > 1000 SP you're well above that status already, and as you continue to collect rewards, your influence will continue to grow. There are a number of bloggers who started with nothing and are well over 10000 SP already (maybe >100K?) and I expect that some of the recent group of well-known bloggers joining Steem (you, Jeff, etc.) will probably advance faster.
I seriously doubt there are any cop whales (my personal opinion only) but I'm sure you are aware that pressure can, and perhaps will, be applied. If influence hasn't sufficiently dispersed (see above) before that happens, it could be an issue. All should remain vigilant.
Every single one of his posts have earned him money, he doesn't really know what it is to be the average user on steemit. I am starting to wonder how do I get enough attention to my work and have realized that people pay more attention to steemit related subjects than what makes the individual steemit user unique. Seems like writing stories barely got me a few $ and the only real money I have been rewarded was by adressing a steemit related subject in one of my early articles. Thats another flaw in the system if you ask me. You often see the same people coming back on the top page, wondering if they are making it there because of their content or because of their name. Let me tell you, If I was the one who wrote what you just have written, your message would have been unheard.
This has been true, but it is changing quickly. Most whales are not voting on Steemit-related posts anymore; they are trying to elevate other content. It just takes time for the SP to be more widely distributed. @kuriko I am sending you a direct message through the chat site to discuss your blog.
Is the goal to spread SP widely or should SP go to people who bring the most positive attention and resources to Steemit? If it's about bringing value to Steemit then you cannot deny that Dollar Vigilante is bringing value, even if it's measured under the political anarchist spectrum.
If in theory someone could convince Elon Musk to post on Steemit then we wouldn't be shocked if Elon Musk immediately got lots of upvotes. It's not a bad thing either because if Elon Musk is impressed by Steemit then he may tell his friends and that is good.
It is harder for minnows, for people just starting out, for people new to cryptocurrencies, and some whale power should be dedicated to searching for quality posts among minnows. I just don't think it should be at the direct expense of quality posts from celebrity posters or from established posters. It creates direct animosity if you say you're robbing peter to pay paul, or taking from Dollar Vigilante to spread the wealth to unnoticed minnows.
Instead, it should be that you solve the underlying problem of attention scarcity among the whales. Solve that and the minnows will be noticed more. Over time as whales power down the problem will solve itself because more people will have enough SP to make a difference for a blogger, if and only if the price of Steem continues to rise in the future.
Same goes here. My technical analysis get little to no rewards and the same guys get rewarded all the time.
Most average writers will never see the main page or "trending page". There is a growing talent entering the Steemit Community everyday and I don't expect to compete with these brilliant writers and bloggers. What I do think I can do in compete in my area of interest or my hobby. Maybe then I can make it to the "trending" page under MY category. That is definitely more realistic in my opinion.
That is because he's not an average blogger off Steemit. The people who are able to do well on Steemit from the beginning are people who already have an audience, a large social network, a lot of connections, a lot of resources, and it's no different than if someone brings a lot of Bitcoins to buy Steem Power directly. In this case it's people who are bringing celebrity status and social power from other places such as the anarchist community.
It's valuable to Steemit so Steemit rewards it. If any celebrity posts on Steemit it will be heavily rewarded at this early stage. So who is to blame if the other celebrity types refuse to post on Steemit? Bring your favorite celebrities to Steemit and upvote them.
Thanks for the minnow correction mr. smooth. Your analysis and advice to remain vigilant is spot on. I'm glad to see you come up for air when you are supposed to. lol. Peace.
@smooth is up for air very often actually ;) very dedicated Whale in my opinion!
even if you arent a minnow, you are speaking for the minnows...respect
I don't know how a person that's making 2000$ on his post is mad, I've been here for a week and introduced a few of my friends and haven't made more then 8 cents so sorry if I don't feel your pain.
I guess I'm just thankful enough to be off of crap ass Facebook or Twitter, 8 more cents then any of them gave me.
So thanks #steemit .Aswell as to @dan and @ned for starting this wonderful site.
Welcome aboard
When supreme court judges vote whether it be yes or no, (Because it has such a huge impact on a given case and the future) they usually publish an opinion on why they voted they way they did .. Perhaps something could be implemented at least at in attempt at transparency ? Just sayin ...
Read More, Reason More ... JTS
Smooth, there might still be cop whales, or whales with SOME political objective, one that isn't wholly benevolent. Think of it as a kid who likes arcade games, but also doesn't mind cheating or playing dirty in order to get all the tickets. Some whales might just be crooked people, and we don't want to play in an arcade where we might spend our quarters on a game that's already out of tickets.
I mean, that sort of analogy is kinda convoluted, but eh. It's valid. We want a website where we don't have to worry about pissing off a whale. What if someone with a bit of popularity wanted to talk about a REALLY controversial subject, and ended up pissing off a whale? That could ruin a person just for having an opinion, and that'd be rather unfair. Flagging ought to be down because of illegal or legitimately low-quality content, but it's not a secret that you can flag for any reason at all.
Even so, I don't really think that this problem is as big as the OP is saying. I haven't met any friendly or unfriendly whales so far. I'm just having fun posting stuff and reading new ideas.
~Kitten
These flippant uses of phrases like "use of force" and "censorship" drive me crazy, especially from someone who should know better! You really think a whale who downvotes in a way you don't like on a voluntary network is the same as a cop kicking some kids teeth in? 'Cause that's effectively what you're saying.
Participation in steem and steemit is voluntary! Try telling a cop, "Oh, I'm not going to participate in the Drug War." They don't care, and they will arrest and cage you. Government coercion is absolutely, fundamentally different from steemit downvotes and content control!
[
] Hello @mikemacintire
Very well said. No whale has ever helped me and I am doing fantastic here on steemit. I think this is the best I have ever seen. I am allowed to do what I want. It is not so terrible to behave nice.
I want to say this to everyone on steemit
[
]
Regards
The Viking from Norway
Unfairly taking a person's money is an illegitimate use of force whether the government does it or a private company. Cops kicking in the teeth of a kid is a much more gruesome and dark use of force so I'm strongly against that. That said, I never compared a down vote to a cop kicking a kids teeth in. Are you high? The use of force whether its from the government or from steemit is illegitimate if it's not done in self defense. I'm not sure how you claim government force is fundamentally different than steem force? I fully agree the government is much more violent and uses more force than Steem but force is force no matter who is using it. Right @mikemacintire?
No one is taking your money. Once it is in your wallet that is yours and no one has the power (without extremely drastic measures, i.e. hard fork ) to touch that. But in-progress post rewards are always subject to change due to changing votes, market prices, changes to other post earnings, etc. People can add votes, remove votes, add downvotes/flags, all of which change the post reward amount. Until it is paid out, it is still part of the Steem reward pool, and not your money, yet.
@smooth and @the-ntf .
I respectfully disagree about hiding it at all.
We need to be able to see at a glance what the payout is in order to know if it deserves to be rewarded more with our vote; to not be rewarded more with our vote; or to be knocked down by our flag. It is every users responsibility to have a say in how the pie is shared. If you have to dig in to every post and click a button to see where that post is in value it only serves to make the system less transparent, less accurate and less efficient.
I vote to leave the rewards visable and make it more obvious how the system works to all users in order to let people do the right thing, eventually...
Though I guess it would cut down on the anger people have when a crap article gets paid $1000 and their objectively better, but unseen, article gets $0.10... : wink :
I disagree with this. Steemit needs to evolve so that people are not just rewarding content in ways they think will do well or because they think they are worth what they've got so far, we should be liking what we like for what we like about it. Currently we're not that incentivised to play this way. Removing the reward count on the main page would help with that, once the community has really expanded and remain active.
But I do agree that to ensure distribution of rewards which many whales are working on, certain curators need to be able to find what content hasn't done well and maybe should have among other purposes. This data will always be visible on the blockchain, and if you really want to base your vote on what somebody has already made you can still do that, it just won't be as easy as it won't be visible on the main page.
Funny... people earn hundreds/thousands of dollars more than they EVER did on Facebook or any other social network, and yet still people want to complain about the "unfairness" of the system...
So much misdirected angst towards the whales - completely forgetting its their funding that makes this site possible. Sad how some produce content from a mistaken sense of entitlement rather than learning the rules of the game and understanding the depths of VALUE, putting their talents & passion to use contributing to the community vs resisting a system in deveopment whose flaws still are huge steps forward from other models...
I agree - Although a real newbie here, I love the idea of seeing which of my posts and which topics catch the attention of other Steemers, either whales or minnows. I'm on here for the fun of it - any steem that comes my way will be a bonus. :-) Stuart.
Thank you. Not many other comments in this thread made any sense and I couldn't articulate myself as good as you did.
Hope posts like these don't make it far in the future cause I'm tired of reading them.
Smooth, if the payout isn't yours until the vote time is completed, I would suggest that's a reason not to publish a number. Or perhaps only the person who posted the content can see the accumulated total.
Unless it's all immediately on the blockchain and there's no way to not see it, of course.
It is immediately on the blockchain but that doesn't mean that it necessarily has to always be thrust in peoples faces either. Maybe there is some UI redesign that could help reduce misunderstandings about just what the number means. Perhaps a button you have to press labeled with something like "Show in-progress voting" could be used. I'm just throwing out ideas here.
Your point about not showing a number until the money is your does make logical sense, so I think this deserves some consideration.
I don't really mind about the numbers. The numbers have their own usefulness as people can use it as a factor to evaluate or make certain decisions on the post. And yes they have their drawbacks as well. But I think it's fair, as the the rule is not subjective and applies for everyone. Making it an honest rule.
It's mainly important to show the number so the community can review it.
If anyone would like to hide the dollars amounts, they are free to do so as I outlined here. Complaints about money that is still part of the changing reward pool prior to payout seems a bit like an entitlement mentality to me. The rest of the article brings up valid and important concerns.
I think post earnings being hidden by default will have a good effect on people judging posts by the quality of their content instead of how much money they made. But it will have a bad effect on new users coming to steemit. Because that homepage with the big numbers sure does attract people.
Yes personally I would recommend simply removing the dollar symbol from the number. It makes people think they've "earned" money when in fact the value could change, and after the voting period only a fraction of it is earned with actual steem dollars, and much of it going to the curators. The reasoning for this makes sense, but putting the dollar symbol maybe not.
Perhaps put impermanent numbers next to the permanent ones with a dotted line around them, in fainter font color. Have a legend that shows that number labeled as "subject to change" and the other number "permanent earnings."
This is true but you still don't have your voting preferences in any public place so we can know what you'll vote down so we can avoid generating that content. As a result, how are we bloggers to know we aren't being voted down for arbitrary reasons such as a bad mood, or political disagreement?
Why don't you reveal your criteria once and for all for what you'll downvote. Why wait for a post to make "too much money" to reveal it violates some hidden standard?
Can't any of us change our voting criteria at any time?
You nailed it! @smooth
End of issue!
I apologize for the "cops kicking a kids teeth in" part of my argument.
When a boxer punches another boxer in the ring, why isn't it a rights violation? Because they entered the ring voluntarily.
By the same token, when a steem participant loses rewards based on the rules of the system they voluntarily chose to participate in, it's not stealing or "unjustified" in the sense that government violence is unjustified.
We might want the voting system to be different or disagree with the whales behavior, but there is no rights violation. There is no aggression or initiation of force in the way that government does, because government is not voluntary, and steem is. @barrycooper
If the boxing game promised fair competition (censorship resistances) but the rules encourages other forms of behaviour (whales turning day into night) then surely those who invested their time and effort into the game, or in this case created content, have the right to speak out?
This is another submissive argument that's been posted: you didn't put any money in/you are getting more out of this than Facebook so don't complain. It's quite counterproductive because it suppresses constructive discussions.
I spent quite some time about working out how to implement a fair and accurate reputation system, and one of the things that I worked out was that downvoting should not be permitted. Post a post instead saying how crap you think they are, see how that goes? Makes you realise what a dumb idea it is after all.
In my humble opinion, upvotes cost money, downvotes lower the poster on YOUR feed. Whoever you upvote, their downvotes lower the poster to the degree you upvote them on your feed. Downvoting should just be shunning, not actual punishment. Votes should be irrevocable.
For sure. In fact, I can't help but think of it similar to trying to sue a casino for one's losses. You walk in knowing the risk. If that's how you want to react to it, then it's obvious you didn't understand the risk.
There is no rights violation but it's still not transparent. The whales are black boxes with preferences we can't decipher in advance. Maybe by requesting they post their voting preferences we can resolve this dispute. Whales who post the reasons they'll downvote will be more trusted than whales who downvote because they feel like it.
The whales are people with preferences that change from day to day. What one downvotes today is not necessarily what they will downvote tomorrow -- same as their upvotes.
You don't get to know who is going to flag your post, or vote for your post, until you post it.
Voting for someone to be paid less isn't taking money away.
I have to agree with @smooth. Here's the funny thing. If you truly had a problem with Steemit, you'd have written this article on Medium. But you didn't. Why I wonder? Why would you participate in such government sponsored coerced project? :)
So now we are blaming others for lost profits?
"I'm not sure how you claim government force is fundamentally different than steem force?"
It's very different. We don't elect whales.
It's not unfair if they were to list their criteria from the beginning but it's unfair if the bloggers have no clue what certain whales vote preferences are and then find out on the fly as seemingly arbitrary reasons are given.
Encourage the whales to be transparent about what they'll downvote so they can be held accountable to their own criteria.
That attitude will get you far!
First: Very cool that Barry realizes that the CIA has their fingers in every pie the Fed cares about. I wish most libertarians were that aware. (This is a consequence of the nature of cybernetics or "the science of good/powerful/effectie governance." The book "The Human Use of Human Beings" by "Cybernetics" author Norbert Wiener goes into a lot of detail on this subject.)
Second: There is a force continuum. A lot of people here are treating force like an "all or nothing" binary value, hence the similar repeated criticisms. While it's true that curtailing discussion doesn't rise to the level of police aggression, or "direct physical violence" it is what is known as "an appeal to force"; an argumentation fallacy. Essentially, censorship of any kind, (anything other than free speech absolutism) reveals a deeply unfair, unintelligent, and un-American culture.
Should the Whales be forced to modify the Steem community? Only through market pressure, which is the counter-force to censorship. Physical force shouldn't be used against them, the threat of users "voting with their feet" should be.
I hope, like Barry, that the voting method becomes more "democratic" in the proper sense of the term. (In the sense it's used in the book "The Wisdom of Crowds" by James Surowiecki, and "Out of Control" by Kevin Kelly.
Heck, maybe Barry can lend his expertise to the site designers to show them how to ferret out the spooks. ;)
Please... No strawman please.
Barry never said use of physical force. It's a well-informed article on his worry that an law enforcement agents could potentially distort the vote because of the disproportional voting rights.
Even if a "Cop Whale" had all the power in the world on Steemit. He/she still could not remove your content from the blockchain... once it's there, it's there for good. Also, if you were to say, build up your following to a very high level, even a multitude of Whale DownVotes couldn't stop your followers from reading your content. You are also lowering the potential power of the steemit bottom percentile. If, for sake of argument, Steemit grows to 1 million users by then, the sheer numbers would create a balance.
Very cool blueorgy. Thanks. I realize a publishing can't be erased but is it true a cop whale can stop one of my articles from moving forward? And can he downvote me to the loss of $2000. I realize no person can stop my followers from seeing the content but I don't consider my followers as my only audience. Even though I will have a lot of followers who will upvote me and see my publishings, can a multitude of whales downvote causing me to lose cash? It is comforting to know that at least all my followers will get my posts. I've been wanting that leisure for a very long time. I love that part about Steem.
When it comes to monetizing your posts sadly yes Whales have a huge say in this and it's something we should probably have a much longer discussion about. Because they have a majority of the power vested in Steemit they have the most say when it comes to monetary value of a post... As for the visibility of your post from multiple Whale DownVotes this seems to be less intrusive. The most recent example would be @berniesanders DownVoting a post (I'm sure i don't have to reference it) although it lost its STEEM value it was still very much trending and had a lot of discussion on it due to comments and UpVote counts.
Ps. you've been followed ;) lets see what you bring to the table!
Big love. Thanks for the good insight and thanks for the follow. I'm curious about some posts I've already written. They are bit risky but I'm going to try a few soon.
I think it may be time to test the waters... Yes, that was a Whale pun.
Also you may think this is cool: Steem.Cool - web app I built that gives more incite into your reputation.
You are mistaken to some degree. It wasn't a single whale's vote that cost Jeff the money. Rather it was a very large number of them. His post was downvoted a total of like...47 times, many of them by whales.
And yet, even then it still managed to earn over $100, which is far more than the average post here on Steemit earns.
In short, no single "cop whale" can deprive a poster of tons of money. Only many whales acting together can make a post worth thousands, or subsequently deprive the post of thousands.
It's not a defect. It's by design. Fortunately for you and anyone else that doesn't like it, the source code is open and third party alternative platforms are welcome in the marketplace. Maybe one of the new alternative steem-based platforms will be crafted more to you subjective preferences.
I hope that eventually we going to just read, upvote and comment posts and not speculating who and how much earn on each post or comment. Reward will come sooner or later. Or am I just naive?
Nothing was taken from @dollarvigilante. It was an estimate of the value that his post was going to produce. It turned out to be a lot less than the original estimate... Nothing that was in his possession was ever taken from him. Now, he might have gotten his hopes up, because of the potential earnings. But that didn't materialize.
Though I do agree with some of your larger points.
This is unfortunately very accurate.
@barrycooper, I agree with a lot of what you said, but if we want to ensure that Steem/Steem Dollars keep their value, we need to focus on coming up with uses for the Steem blockchain in business and other areas that will create buy support and long-term investment and engage users. This problem is way beyond the mechanics of the Steemit front-end and the politics of blogging.
The whales understand the economics here and the situation the minnows are facing.
Are you being facetious here? There aren't that many in the U.S. govt. that are even competent with this technology, but I guess it's totally possible.
Lol. Let's not try to prevent something we don't like by imposing rules. Allow for completely free flow of information and see what happens.
As you ascend to "Whaledom" don't forget the little guys like me:
@venuspcs } @scifiwriter | @the-how-to-guy - all my accounts so please follow and vote for me. Thanks!
Social Network in the beta version.
Yes true. I am on steemit for a month now and they have improved a lot since than A LOT. Im sure their main focus is to make everything work first and after everything works proper they will start to play around with the design :D We just need to hold on also i can't wait until the phone app with push notification will be released :DDD
Already an excellent mobile app out there !
https://steemit.com/steem/@good-karma/steem-mobile-beta-0-0-4-with-android-and-ios-new-features-voting-login-view-changes-and-a-lot-more-come-join-testing
I fully agree moneymaker. I have faith in Steem. I'm sticking it out and am happy to be a part of it.
Faith in Steem? 100%. Power Up and hold is the key to success here.
I'm powering up until y'all tell me to quit. lol.
yes totally the human race in Beta Version ! nice ; - )
¨This unfair use of force ¨ The way steem works currently is that it redistributes 5% of the stack-holders money to content providers. Currently the main stack-holders are the so called steem whales. So its currently mainly their money that is redistributed. Therefore why it shouldn't be their decision for what they want to spent their money and for what not? Even if one whale is starting to behave bad, still other whales could overpower him.
With 5% redistribution per year sooner or later more and more people will get a fair share in steemit. With time whales will become less powerful. Soon with @dan suggestion of vote delegation, a lot more can take part in the voting process with a lot more voting power.
All what i said doesn't mean that I like what @Berniesanders did with his flagging. Currently there no such thing called down-vote implemented. Flagging somebody should not be equal to: ¨oh I think this post is not worth this much money¨. Fagging should be used very carefully and not end in an like and dislike war.
The DollarVigilante abused his influence by posting bogus content about money making with Steemit. This is why he got whale-flagged.
Wow... $100,000 is a whale? Today I am a whale. I will up vote you with my power.
Before:
6 hours ago by barrycooper59$444.59
218 votes
After: 6 hours ago by barrycooper59$471.12
222 votes
well... I tried. Enjoy the $29, I wish you joy and happiness.
It sometimes is hard to get seen with good articles but if you catch just one whale it can make the difference. Some of my articles did well. Some are much more deserving like my recent one CRYPTOWARS. Yet it will be lucky to get 50 cents for whole writing. Just is what it is at this point.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts about steemit.com and the whales ... It is really providing ample food for thought. Best wishes from Germany!
Remove the down vote. Period. If one gets 1,000 up-ticks, hurray. 20? Woo-hoo. Zero. Meh. If I do not like someone or what they post, I just let them languish without my attention at all. I post something stupid, I get no votes, my little troll heart dwindles and I sulk and/or go away. There is no real purpose for the downvote. In the market, one either buys, or does not buy. One does not go to the crappy burger joint and take money out of the cash register if one dislikes the food or service.
You need down votes to keep the spammers and scammers at bay. They're also useful for pushing down posts that are poorly written, "first post!" comments, posts that consist of the sole word "agreed," and the like.
Unfortunately, there's no way to prevent people from downvoting because they disagree with the poster. Since this is mostly an anarchist site, at least at the moment, a thoughtful well written post about, say, Jill Stien, is going to get downvoted into oblivion because of the opinions expressed. That will remove the opportunity to open a discussion (pointing out the multitude of reasons Jill is a horrible choice), and risks turning the place into a echo chamber, where we only hear what we agree with.
One solution would be to give less weight to a down vote than to an up vote. Instead of a single whale downvote canceling out a hundred guppy upvotes, make a downvote only count for, say, 1/4 of what an upvote is worth. That way the truly crappy posts and comments could still be squashed down by the masses, without having to worry about ticking off a single whale and losing everything you would have otherwise earned.
You really don't get it. This is not good content, it is just you learning how to use the system. You have been muted until you can produce some content worth reading.
The current whales are upvoting and distributing Steem Power to these so called 'minnows' and by doing so are raising the next generation of whales. Given time it will balance itself out. I am on a very, very, slow and gradual path to my ultimate goal of 'Potato Whale'.
@barrycooper, I am excited to see this substantive discussion being lead by you on Steemit. Over the last 10-15 years, I remember seeing and hearing good things about you. Thank you for staying vocal fighting for the little guy.
Regarding your use of the term "unfair"
The criticism of fairness is invalid because the platform was not designed to optimize fairness. Steemit.com has only ONE purpose and that is to increase the value of $STEEM.
Regarding the concentration of voting power in a few number of accounts "whales",
This is exactly the opposite of what whales want. Currently, as the people with the most skin in the game, they want to maximize the value of the platform. If you look at Steemwhales.com the top 10 acounts are EACH down several hundred thousand dollars in the last week. They are motivated to change. They can only do this by increasing the number of posts that become popular. They are aware that the concentration of vests hurts them and things are being done to fix it. The "people rank" system that @dantheman has introduced is the first serious attempt to spread out the voting power. They are doing this precisely because they do not want 20 people to be the only ones who can make something trend. So while it may seem unfair I can assure you it is equitable for the $STEEM holders. There are financial interests that are motivating people with disproportionate voting power to spread it out. @smooth has been hiring curators to help him find more quality content. With the new WOT system, I expect to see rewards normalize over a few weeks to a larger base of posts.
I really like this and thank you for the well thought out " human " article . I am already bored of those kind of discussions. Just enjoy Steemit and stop thinking who will vote for you.
Its beautiful to be a little colourful fish around those whales
Me being a minnow a very small minnow will probably never get to interact with a whale as what I have to write won't interest them. I don't know enough to attract there attention, But if I get a get a net big enough I might be able to trap one lol
#stayoutporkers
I will do my best to also become a whale by being super active and a member of #MinnowsUnite with hundreds of other users. We try our best to vote on blogs that should be seen and fight malicious whales.
If I had it would have spread...and looked into the ones that want attention...why the big whales get bigger....I think at times we all are unsecured of somethings.
Agreed.
I've seen plenty of examples of what you're talking about. The notion that whales need to 'approve' of your posts to gain any compensation and/or notoriety is a harsh truth.
I do believe is magnifies the way people are attempting to scratch their way to the top via 'appeasing' content versus substantial information and value-added postings.
Thanks @barrycooper for putting it out there.
Nice read. Using the right tags I think for my specific community (Esperanto) this wouldn't really be a problem (in a niche you won't make so much money anyway), but it's nice this is something to the attention of people anyway, and that something can be done about it!
Good post Barry. Thanks for sharing.
Like many others, I've not made the nice splash you did. Kinda stinks, because my content is good. But it's just not getting any recognition.
I love to see folks making some bucks from this. But it is discouraging when you know you've put out something really good and it gets nada, while someone makes a smartass comment and gains a couple of g's overnight.
I'm really happy for them, but what gives? I just posted an article asking that question. No complaints here. But I really want to be a part of the solution, so that good content is getting rewarded and noise is being muffled. Stick it out and make it better, right?
It seems that unless your famous or have the whales attention already, nobody even looks at your posts. It seems to take a random whale bot to upvote your blog one day to actually get exposure. I've seen a bot's post make it up on the trending list with copy/past articles that recieved 500$. The whole system is pretty wack for newcomers with the distribution of power so one sided. I hope the site can grow, it would be great to see other non-famous newcomers atleast get some attention.
Great article, definetly makes you wonder? The gov is everything now a days.
You have addressed my primary concern for Steemit; the potential for abuse is there. If I post false information, or plagiarize, then I would expect to do poorly. But I am at the mercy of those that may disagree with my opinion and use this to sap away whatever I might earn, which so far is nothing. One whale should not have the power to diminish a hoard of minnows, this is placing too much power in the hands of the few and this is something I am very much against.
I couldn't agree more with your general idea that steemit seems to favor whales over small players, and the same as you, I'm not going to lose faith on this "experiment" this early on.
I hope that the people in charge of steemit read your post and take a stand on this issue.
In the current situation, there isn't a balance between SP and voting power. of course people with more SP should have more voting power, but this power shouldn't be concentrated among the top whales.
Well, fuck.
I've just been noticing this myself!
Funny. I just published a piece here on Steem analyzing the phenomenon of grown adults whining about how it's not fair. It garnered me a lovely nada and yet here you are, a grown adult whining about how unfair it all is and you have $2200 for doing so. Stop whining.
Maybe the solution is to not allow Wales to "Down Vote" posts. So once your reach threshold in Steem, you can only up vote. This would limit the censorship and still allow for a type of "Lobbying" to gain steem. My thought is that the free market will always win, so when enough "good" whales who don't have an axe to grind are in powerful positions, the system will take care of itself. Besides, people who succeed are the ones who know how to play the game... Don't invest if you don't plan to study the way the market works...
Greetings Brother~
Don't know if you remember me or not but I just got into Steemit and red this article. Thanks for posting it, its a great and important article that will make an impact. I still love Steem and feel it is very valuable but you did make sure to mention you did too and that being on it was the smart thing to do so LETS MAKE THE MOST OF IT. What I do love is that we do have influence even if we are not whales and over time if we keep making valuable contributions we will have more and more influence. So lets work together to make this the best it can be!
Also if you are keen I would appreciate if you read my article I wrote today and let me know what you think as I would value your opinion and know there are many people who do.
Thanks!
https://steemit.com/revolution/@quinneaker/why-steemit-is-so-important-and-even-revolutionary#@miki/re-quinneaker-why-steemit-is-so-important-and-even-revolutionary-20160813t024032747z
I think that the idea I can slowly increase the worth of my input is a good thing. I am ok with Whales having the power they do. At the end of the day, if you have really good content, you will rise to the top.
Besides let them down downvote, at the end of the day I just want people to read or listen to my content. The money is secondary.
Hey Barry thanks for such a informative post I have only been here for a few days and can see that there is a wide circle of influence that lives here on steemit it seems there are politics even in a free voting system like this.
Maybe flagging shouldn't be anonymous, like you can only flag from a comment. That way you have to enter into a debate. The author has to better defend their position, and even alter their opinion, and in so doing undo the flag.
It isn't anonymous. Anything and everything that happens on steemit is on the blockchain. For example this comment.
There is a bit of confusion because sometimes the flags can't be seen on the steemit website, but you are correct they are always visible on the blockchain, the details of which can be reviewed using the advanced mode at steemd.com
Maybe hovering over the flag should reveal this information? Since its available anyway? Just some thoughts. I guess most users don't look into the blockchain and more or less stay on steemit itself.
Thanks for the info!
I saw a post about some guy whining about getting his blogs flagged continually, about Islamophobia. I agree, I dont want to hear about it, not going to read it, certainly would never upvote it. I dont know if hate speech was involved, but may very well make the case that free speech is still censored to some degree. I am hoping that things level out to some degree. I'm staying.
To be fair, no publishings should be censored. If a racist hater posts something crazy, it won't go anywhere....but he should still be able to publish. It's not fully free speech if there is any censoring. Jennsky. Big hug and peace to you though.
It's not censored in the same way it can be deleted from Facebook or Twitter. Flagged posts are given less visibility and rewards, but they are still available if you want to read them, and furthermore the record of what happened and who did it is entirely public, unlike what happens on Facebook or Twitter's servers.
I think you are right that this has the ::potential:: for severe abuse, but I think extrapolating the flagging of one post out into infinity can be a dangerous thing to do. Some whales flagged Jeff's post for reasons that they think are in the best interest of the Steemit platform. That is what investors should be doing.
If over a prolonged period of time, these powerful people continue to flag those they disagree with or simply dislike, I will ignore them here or even move on to another platform if I feel the environment is hostile to open discussion.
This is a market and we are all free to make choices however we see fit, but I tend to think that the whales value their investment and the platform itself, and will flag only for the net benefit of the site in the long run.
Also, I decided to take the initiative to tie my voting declaration to the blockchain, so that way there is an established, public record of how I will vote:
https://steemit.com/myvotingdeclaration/@derekareith/my-voting-declaration
I've wrote about this issue myself and argued for a much flatter vote reward system. We could also discuss whether a flagging system should even exist unless it only hides posts for you.
https://steemit.com/steemit/@zorrotmm/this-platform-will-succeed-but-how-easily-could-it-be-beaten
This article took a totally weird turn after saying there is heavy censorship and whales might be cops or CIA and ending with
"I’m all in. I’m trying to power up everything I make because the experts predict Steem money will rapidly grow in value. I think it’s one of the best investments a person can make at this moment."
Seems a little schizophrenic or, at least, a little unjustifiably hopeful that things will change.
This was a nicely rational and objective take on the subject.
Great read. Still really glad you decided to come on board Barry!
"P.S. Please don't let cops become Whales."
Probably too late.
I see "drug-expert" version of @dollarvigilante!
All hail democracy!
All hail freedom of speech!
All hail steemit!