I'm sorry that you feel targeted by this, I think right now there is just too strong of a case of stealth self-vote abuse from the main 3 account that consistently upvote you and only you in the last few hours. It would be great if you could disclose your relationship with these people, @snowflake @freeyoumind and @someonewhoisme.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yet your explanation for downvoting revolves a lot around self voting.
@snowflake @freeyourmind and @someonewhoisme are all managed by me, @mindhunter is definetely not my account else I would have voted this account long before. It's very obvious that I am not self voting and that @mindhunter is a different person. Have a look through my posts please.
Hey @snowflake, sorry to side-jack this comment here but you just verified via your comment that you are controlling the @someonewhoisme account also. I didn't know about @freeyourmind but I will follow it as well.
I messaged you on SteemIt.Chat about possibly getting your witness support. You seem quite knowledgeable about what it takes to be a worthy witness and I feel quite strongly if you took a few minutes to investigate my current offerings as well as future plans for steem you wouldn't move showing some love.
Mindhunter pays you a share of the reward from your upvotes. That mean you are not actually curating anything but voting his content regardless of quality for profit, which is what I define as selfish pool raping.
On his side @Mindhunter is producing a many post of dubious quality because he knows he's going to get it up-voted irregardless.
Doesn't take a genius to figure the scheme out.
That's the same issue with @randowhale @booster @bellyrub @discordia and all others. They all do the same. They upvote automatically any type of content. If you want to fix the world you should start from the top - the bigger pool drainers
So he is effectively buying votes from whales, not different from all the vote buying scheme on steemit..everyone is here to make money and preventing the biggest stake holders to earn is a stupid thing to do.
If investors can't mine without getting their 'machine shut down' then they aren't going to invest in the first place. Remember blogging is the new mining, some people just want to mine they don't care or don't have time to post life stories on a social media site...
Seems to be working for stocks, other cryptos, and various and traditional other investment vehicles, through the time honored mechanism of capital gains. Steem was actually mined for a brief time prior to the creation of Steemit, so mining the rewards pool isn't really mining at all.
Do let me know how selling votes is mining? Actual mining increases the amount of currency, whether gold coins or cryptohashes. Selling votes simply redirects currency into the wallets of those concerned.
As for those that just want to drain the rewards pool, and lack interest in actually contributing valuable content, well, I await with bated breath the opportunity to avoid them in their droves.
Steem is around ~$1 presently. BTC is ~$4k. Were Steem to reach but 1% of BTC's valuation, investors would realize 4000% returns on present holdings of Steem. Since I reckon the most salient factor in why Steem doesn't rapidly appreciate and exceed the value of BTC is the perception of unfairness and rampant scamming of the rewards system, it is exactly profiteering such as you are conducting that is preventing the vastly superior returns capital gains offers investors.
I just want the censoring and propaganda mills like Gargle, Fakebook, and Twatter to die, so that free speech, and the felicity of good governance that informs, can ensue.
I reckon that more valuable to me than mere money.
Mining essentially means creating new money. Witnesses are the block producers so technically they are the one putting these new coins into existance but steem users allocate them.
They are competing to earn those new issued coins, exactly like miners do. And the more they invest the more reward they receive.
So you think only users who contribute valuable content are entitled to rewards?
The flaws of Steemit were not all apparent to the developers, who are only human after all. Certainly they envisioned an imperfect distribution of rewards, intending for ~90% of rewards to inure to ~30% of the accounts.
Instead, their inability to perfectly predict human behaviour has resulted in ~99% of rewards inuring to ~1% of accounts. This was not their intention, and they clearly state that in the white paper.
That is exactly the purpose of rewards, according to the white paper, which explains why the developers set things up the way they did.
Valuable content, and the curators that promote it, are rewarded, as the very and sole purpose of rewards on Steemit.
The rewards pool was not envisioned to be a form of dividend for investors, but rather they state in the white paper that the greater ability to curate good content, per the subjective and personal preferences of those with substantial holdings of SP, was the intended reward.
They specifically state that the perception of financial manipulation - and clearly vote selling is exaclty that - is an existential threat to Steemit.
Miners do not compete for issued coins. They compete to ISSUE the coins. Mining did occur on Steem, and is the source of the majority of Steem today. Those mined coins are intended to be distributed through curation.
Not through botnets, selfvoting, or vote selling.
truth 😉
Thank you!!!! I agree
Really? Because I am actually enjoying sharing my creativity.....in a place where I'm actually meeting tons of people who are "like minded." So much drama and this is the problem that money creates......why can't it just be about everyone getting a fair share of the pie and live in harmony?
Please present your full case. This platform is riddled with 'I thinks'!! Even if it was self-voting it's not abuse. Those who sow on this platform are entitled to reap. They have invested heavily in the platform, so who are you to judge them?
Reward pool rape and the TRUE abuse of Steemit is where whales Power Down and load 100K+ Steem onto the market. I think your 'I thinks' would be better targeted at them - IMHO.
BTW I'd be interested in learning more about how Steem is anywhere near "Socialist" and how Steem is a democracy. Would definitely reward one of your post trying to explain that.
P.S. Hey @transisto, can you take me off your @newflash Steemvoter? - it's still downvoting me -5% on some posts. Many thanks :)
I'd say Steemit is a progressive libertarian platform with elements of the hard left and the hard right in its outer fringes. Call me an alt-progressive - but don't ask me to explain that! 😛
It is self voting then? In other words, do you control those accounts?Just read @snowflake 's comment, never mind 😅"Reward pool rape" is generally held to mean exactly what @transisto is accusing you of here - collusive voting taking large rewards. What you're talking about is just dumping.
The reward pool rape is a misconception based on a flawed assumption that rewards in the pool are scarce and finite.
Your voting power allows you to use a certain portion of that pool, it's basically 1SP = 1RPP ( reward pool portion) there is no 'rape' and there is no 'taking large rewards', your rewards are pre determined by the amount of steem power that you have.
The real people raping the reward pool are those dumping steem on the market not allowing the reward pool to grow in value.
That would only be the case if every account voted once in a certain time period with the same weight. But that obviously isn't the case.
The reward pool is finite, it is precisely calculated, you can get this number from the blockchain. I calculate it regularly in my calculations. It is given by the following formula:
reward_pool = reward_balance / recent_claims, wherereward_balanceandrecent_claimsare available values from the Steem API.You can see it here at @penguinpablo 's SteemNow calc (explanation) and read about the reward pool (also by him) here. TLDR; it's about 48,029.695 a day (depending on a few factors).
The more that large stakeholders vote, the more they use because rewards are proportional to the total vote reward shares (
rsharesin the code) which are currently pending (i.e. before payout).So this is what is meant by reward pool rape. Problematic term but widely used none the less.
If you knew this already I do not mean to be patronizing, just exact and clear.
This is all not to say that people dumping steem is bad for the price, which effects the market value for the rewards and thus reward pool, it's just a different thing.
I meant to say everyone has the same reward potential relative to their steem power.
The reward pool's value isn't.
I have shown that it is, as long as it continues to be used. It is bounded.