Do you really think this post adds value to steem in any way?
PS considering its top promoted also(!) I believe you recognize that it was "probably" a mistake
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Do you really think this post adds value to steem in any way?
PS considering its top promoted also(!) I believe you recognize that it was "probably" a mistake
There is no mistake here. Yes, this adds plenty of value by demonstrating that the CTO of Steemit inc. is nothing but a troll who wants to be able to control who earns and who doesn't on this platform. I would say the 61 current votes and 67 views demonstrate that.
A prime example is his voting of @dollarvigilante who auto-posts everything and hasn't commented here in over 2 months. Why does Dan vote for that content that adds no value? Just another example, there are plenty more.
Posts of @dollarvigilante can bring us much traffic now and in the future, and they already did. In my humble opinion he added more value than he took away. As of accusing the CTO of steemit that way, can't be considered as an effort for constructive criticism in any way.
Just to let you know, a lot of users left because of Dollarvigilante.
I respect your observation. But can you tell me why in your opinion?
thank you @liondani. It's everything on the blockchain, especially the reason why some left :) but now, with lower payouts, some are leaving the sinking ship, right?
exactly.
Thanks for your opinion. As you can see by the votes, many disagree with you.
I bet the most are not manual votes
Such is life here on Steemit...
Rewarding people like @dollarvigilante is why I've pretty much abandoned Steemit. His posts are crap. Maybe 1 in 20 looks like he put some effort into it, and he spouts pure shit, yet he's some kind of star and is in the 'inner circle' so he gets rewarded for crap.
As for the traffic he's brought here; I couldn't comment on that as I can't see anyway to measure that. Suffice to say, has he spent some of the tens of thousands he's made here marketing Steemit?
Come to think of it, has Dan or Ned spent some of their millions on marketing? That's a big fat no. You can have the best idea in the world, but if you don't tell anyone about it, it will never fly.
Cg
In your opinion it is crap... But see how much followers he has...That is something... don't you think? I don't look how much money someone spend to promote steem but how much exposure he brings to us. Let's give you an extreme example... If Donald Trump would be a regular commenter/poster on steemit would you ask not rewarding him because he is not investing back his rewards or/and is making bullshit comments/posts?
The followers came in the first few weeks. At that point he was adding value, but like most things in life, follow through matters, and when supporting Steem required more follow through and effort without being paid $15K/post, he stopped. At this point it is all auto-pilot and even most of the followers are gone (i.e. look at how few actually comment on his posts any more, other than when discussing how they are ripping off Steem)
In mine and many people's opinion; followers don't prove anything. Donald Trump would clearly bring users to Steemit, if Dollar could bring a tenth or even a hundreth of the people Trump would bring, that would be something. However I doubt he is responsible for more than a couple of hundred extra people, and that is optimistic I reckon.
Cg
To see how much traffic he is bringing now, just check the
viewscounts at the end of every post. ~100 views each.Not that we should be proud of but more than the average views of current trending posts !!!
That means some of the trending posts don't worth the reward as well.
He ups and you down dollarvigillante.
You up and he downs ozchartart.
But sure... There's a difference... of opinion
It added value by being promoted (burning Steem)
Yep it added $20 SBD, that's for sure
Downvoted because you completely miss the point. That the meme of the OP is even possible is a reflection of a much greater drain of steem value than the meme itself. Dan and other founders receieved free coins from an unfair and dubious launch and use those coins to dictate the reward pool, further deteriorating the legitimacy of this coin. A meme is a valid way to criticize scammy behavior and does add value to the platform.
There is nothing unfair or dubious about the launch, I was participating in it myself and I can testify that everything Dan said about the launch is true. E.g. it was relaunched next day not because Steemit's miner stopped working but because there was real overflow bug.
Keep making that claim and I will debunk it in 100 words and 5 lines of code and you will look like a fool in the process.
Censoring him is more effective, right?
I would prefer you bring your 100 words and 5 lines...
Wait! You can censor me too ;)
It's not censorship, it's still on the blockchain! /s
Ok, go ahead and debunk, but please don't cite that guy who was spreading the FUD to mine more for himself. BTW could anyone remind me who it was?
@smooth, it looks like your friend is using flags when he doesn't agree with somebody's opinion, do you support him here too?
Your meme is irrelevant. If you had bothered to understand the history of steem, you'd see that dan and colleagues have conspired endlessly to diminish the value of my holdings and the holdings of other whale outsiders like berniesanders. Their efforts have included dubious relaunches, to trying to fork the coin to reduce our curation rewards, to proposing "negation" of "evil whale" voting power. Of course humans will not act like a grateful dog under these circumstances.
Even the entire "reputation" system is a mechanism to reduce the value of our steem. The founders are spiteful towards outsiders and should be subject to criticism.
Don't you realize that all the changes devs propose affect all stakeholders equally?
Instead of putting yourself into outsiders group and spread the FUD around it would be more productive to collaborate and work together to bring more value to the platform.
Nothing affects all stakeholders equally. Each stakeholder has an individual situation which in part determines determines the effects (positive and negative) of changes on that particular stakeholder. This includes not only things like the size of the holding and how it is or isn't broken up into different accounts but also many factors external to the blockchain.
Sounds like an interesting topic for a post if you ever decide to make one.
You could be double-prosperous right?
The "holdings" from mining steem early on!
Do you really believe that steem has its current value because of the "miners"? Or because of the developers that gave their life for years on the underlying code and a community that supported them all the years? YES you are very lucky you could participate on steem mining early on. You should be grateful for that! I can not respect artificial-whales that contributed nothing
and are bitting non-stop the hand that feed them! I could probably understand and respect more complain-posts that would come from members like @laonie (if I recall the name right) that have invested their hard earning money when steem price was as high as $4. And before making complains about how fair steem mining was read one more time this post because it seems you still don't get it! ... https://bytemaster.github.io/article/2016/03/27/How-to-Launch-a-Crypto-Currency-Legally-while-Raising-Funds/
I thought my comments would have a different outcome to be honest. My mistake.I am very sad about your downvotes @berniesanders...
@steemed not only legitimacy but also the intended legality. It was essential to the entire strategy outlined in that blog posts that mining be open to outsiders.
Your post is contradictory. Early non-insider miners do give the platform value because we give it legitimacy. Try to actually read the post you linked and understand it from the point of legitimacy. What dan and colleagues do is persistently undermine the legitimacy of steem.
To make that clear I am referring to the mining period and not after...
I mean all accounts that had nothing to do with the project except of mining steem... and the rewards (steem) they got because of just mining early on...
... and don't take me wrong but many have contributed much more than most of existing whales compared with their free-wealth...
I mean it means more when someone that has a total of $100 wealth contributes for example half of them aka $50 compared with a whale sitting on $1M (that was not hard earning money) and contributes a total of $100K for example..... I am not referring to contributions after early mining like @smooth and @berniesanders did (curie,busy, etc.)
Mark 12:44
For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living.
You threatened to flag me once for this little gem:
Yeah, WTF right?
THERE you are, you bastard!
lol
Pure hypocrisy!
Cg
I'd downvote your post but I think you are just being snarky. I made no such threat to downvote a meme. If I had there would be evidence of it in the blockchain, and you provide no such evidence.