You are flagging my comment, I'm cool with that. Don't really like it, but I think everyone on this platform is entitled to use their Steem power to the advancement of this community in any way they think is best.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yeh everyone can use their SP however they want and a lot of people choose to use it to upvote @haejin because they value his content
The issue isn't that so many people upvote his content and make him successful. The issue is that one individual (with an upvote worth over $300) in particular is upvoting all of his (@haejin) content indiscriminately and nobody else's. This is further exasperated by the fact that this particular individual (@ranchorelaxo) seemingly came from nowhere and seems to have no other opinions or associations with anyone else but @haejin. It's reasonable to suspect (while far from being proven) that @ranchorelaxo is @haejin or that the two of them are colluding. If that turns out to be the case, he would be defrauding all of us.
@haejin is good at analysis. He should be able to analyze this situation and come up with a transparent solution on his own. It's very easy for an objective thinker to see the importance of the issue to the overall community.
Ok yeh an account worth $4m with such little activity is suspicious, still, no hard evidence that its @haejin's secret other account so we have to give him the benefit of the doubt
Still no hard evidence, but haejin just mentioned an affiliation with rancho. I haven't seen any contact between them on steemit or youtube. Not sure how contact would have been made. Take a look.Let me know what you think.
True, but we can still correct it. If the community doesn't believe these upvotes are rational, they kind of have a responsibility to correct it. Maybe rancho is just a dude who doesn't realize that if he gives a single dude $11k of the community's funds, he does so at the community's expense.
hmmm.. interesting thank you for posting this.
You're welcome.
Ok this seems like you are just talking shit.
EVEN if he was colluding, why aren't you talking about Bernie and his 120 bot accounts? Is that not collusion?
Or is it because this man who produces free content that is backed by his expertise and YEARS of experience is getting more rewards than you can get and it makes you jealous?
Who cares what % of the reward pool he gets. He's EARNING it. He's giving TONNES of people insight into a world they may not have the time to learn or the means to figure it out by themselves. He is generous, caring, and selfless.
And these things scare evil greedy people. It's no wonder all these attackers are after him. When they pay thousands for bots and can't compete with the general good will of the public, you know the system is working!
@Haejin Keep it up, we support and love you for all your hard work!
I'm not sure how you are perceiving this as talking shit. What's your take on the @ranchorelaxo situation? I am no fan of Bernie.
I also want to point out that I never mentioned anything about percentage of the reward pool. I am l am making a concentrated effort to look at this thing from an objective viewpoint. I see Bernie to be a bit of a hypocrite and stated my agreement with the OP on his bully tactics, but the rancho sitution is fishy as fuck. @haejin has benefitted from this attack in terms of added exposure and community charity. The community at large has also benefited as Rancho doesn't seem to be indiscriminately upvoting all of haejin's posts anymore.
Moe, you should know that some are here purely to troll. I admire your efforts in staying reasonable, but on some the wise words are wasted.
Thank you. I try to keep a level head and to force the conversation back to the actual issue at hand. My goal is to relate my position and to understand the position of my adversaries.
The number is then later found out to be 0.6% instead of 6%.
Even after all those massive downvotes, the author is still picking up about 2% of the rewards pool. For me facts are not open to debate, I don't believe in 'alternative facts'.
http://steem.supply/@haejin
I flagged your comment to make a point.
Sure you can use flagging as a tool to control reward distribution. It's an idea that's sound in theory, and I obviously believe in it hence my investment, but it needs a lot of work.
When too much power is in the hands of too few, we all know what happens. And what happened in this case went way beyond "expressing your opinion" when @Berniesanders started to have his followers to down vote not only @Haejin but also anyone who might disagree with him enmasse. That's just abuse of power, plain and simple.
@Haejin is helping people. He has taught me and many others Elliot wave counting and other good market indicators. HE IS HELPING PEOPLE SUCCEED.
bernie is jealous, because his "bot" accounts cannot rape the reward system when there is legitimate insightful content that many people follow.
Even if haejin has 50% of the reward pool I will still upvote him. He is helping me, and bernie is essentially paying himself to hurt haejin.
I will follow him to another platform. We all will. If you wish steem to become some cancerous site censored massively by idiots like bernie, well, you're succeeding. It looks more and more like this every day.
If you'd been following this controversy at ALL rather than just blurting out whatever comes to your brain you may realize it was .6% not 6%. Was told to you here in the replies but yet you repeat incorrect numbers.
You call it facts, but you really, seriously, have changed your number from "6%" to "2%" in the last 2 comments within the period of a few minutes.
You are demonstrating your lack of knowledge on the topic so don't expect anyone to take your word to mean anything.
Just my 2 satoshis.
I have seen 6% before the flagging on haejin began. It's now at around 2%. Show me 0.6% with source please.
Have you tried using the tools avaiable that show How much someone is taking from the pool?
Seems you don't want to believe in true facts either, go and find out what he actually gets paid, not what is due.
Look at the $0 payouts which have been down voted, moments before payout time expired.