You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The Hypocrisy of Supporting @BernieSanders But Yet Fighting @Haejin

in #steem7 years ago

They are both the same. Which is why I find it hilarious that people pick sides.

Haejin would do the same thing to people who disagreed with his TA. My rep was destroyed by him and starjuno for providing some basic research into some of his alt coins he was suggestion like Rain, BERN, Bitconnect. But since it went against his TA, he (and his group) would flag it, even though that research could have saved people a ton of money since I was right and his TA was not.

Then there are also issues where his BTC TA suggests a major correction, yet he would post about Alts exploding, which makes zero sense during such a big BTC correction. Heck even posting the same BTC charts over and over again should be considered spam.

On the opposite end, if I did agree wtih Haejin I would comment and thank him for the post. Then I would get flagged to death by Bernie. It is a lose/lose situation because of people like them.

They are both destroying the platform and are proof that the system is extremely flawed. They really need to cap rewards or have it exponentially more difficult to get past certain levels. Whales going around upvoting each other is a joke. I could be doing this myself but I have more respect for myself and would rather not scam people for profit.

Sort:  

Yeah I agree with u on all points. People should certainly use both Fundamental and Technical Analysis, rather than just one or the other.

In terms of them destroying the platform, they definitely are, but I think as you said it ultimately comes down to the system being flawed and so if they didn't destroy it someone else would have. A cap on rewards would be awesome, so that steemit actually has some sort of difference to regular society. In regular society we have a small amount of people with all the rewards, and on here we have that too, I don't understand what steemit tried to achieve honestly if it wasn't fairer distribution of wealth/earnings.

Maybe one objective was a more general-public controlled environment, but I think this just proved that having some form of government/centralized control is necessary, just when government goes crazy and regulates and puts rules on absolutely everything that it's a really bad thing.