What’s the point though? All that this infighting is doing is dragging Steem down. After almost a year of flagging nothing has changed. At some point tactics need to change?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
What’s the point though? All that this infighting is doing is dragging Steem down. After almost a year of flagging nothing has changed. At some point tactics need to change?
Please explain how flagging is 'dragging Steem down'.
I note that when whales don't vote, or flag each other, the minnows share of the rewards pool grows. We get more rewards in either case.
Thanks!
100% bro, 100%.
^he gets it
Should I go back to flagging everyone who comments on his posts? Or spam with more Kim Jong Un images? What do you suggest?
You have provided no evidence that this "infighting" is "dragging Steem down". You think this is worse that the rape he's committing on the rewards pool?
What about the rape that you're commenting on the rewards pool?
Yeah, silent now, eh?
Give me one fucking solid reason which would justify your action of upvoting the shittiest of your posts to $300 fucking dollars and I'll motherfucking shut my mouth.
Unless you flag your own posts in the end and don't cash in during payout. But do you do that though? You tell me, your blog is not worth my time to go back to anymore.
Possible replies by bernie to my question:
"oh im spreading awareness about scammers"
"oh because i can"
"oh be on your way"
flag
curses
pfffft nah bernie, nah.
C'mon bernie, talk to me buddy :*
I'm going to suggest something crazy to you. What if you just give up?
What you're doing obviously isn't working. There is no incentive for him to stop. It's simple to just keep making posts and upvoting them without having to worry about what you or anyone else is saying about him. And as long as it continues to be profitable then why would he stop?
Because he cares about the platform? Nobody cares about the platform. They only want to protect their investment, however big or small it is. He's being very aggressive and using the means that he has to take as much as he can while there is still something to take.
What you're doing isn't working and is unlikely to ever work. Nobody cares enough.
Now, all that said, here is what I recommend. And I promise I'm not patronizing you or being snide. This is a 100% serious suggestion that you should open your mind to receive.
Why don't you help him?
Seriously. You can't stop him yourself. You can't get enough people to work together to stop what he's doing either, if that's even possible. Why not take advantage of your anonymity and throw your weight behind what he's doing?
Let's assume that @haejin is limited by the amount of articles he can produce in a given day. Why not increase the volume of articles and upvotes and just take a cut of the profits? Start cranking out some TA articles. Or more cryptocurrency analysis. Or finance articles about earnings reports for upcoming stocks.
You could even use upvote bots to promote those posts. Maybe do a little profit sharing. Turn it into an agency or something, maybe do a little marketing and PR for blockchain startups. What company wouldn't pay to get their article mentioned by either one of your accounts - let alone both?
I'm actually not joking at all. And the more I talk about it, the more I'm even getting tempted to do it myself.
I care about the platform. All I've ever wanted to do is produce good quality content and be modestly rewarded for it, and once I get started that's what I intend to do here, whatever nonsense others may be up to. I'm not across the ins and outs of this controversy, but you mustn't assume there are none of us devoted to making Steemit fulfil its potential as platform.
Delegate to me while the door hits you in the ass on your way out.
lmao good one yalla xD
@ned look at this guy buddy, he hates your platform and wants to burn it down to ashes. Flag this cunt asap okay? What's that, oh alright, soon after you're done fixing that hair? Got it. lmao
ded
(no offense ned)
You just said how he is making 10 posts a day taking as much profit as he can while he still can, why would he change models and even join up with someone who has been stifling his growth? No way either of them will team up.
Flagging and upvoting are the 2 ways to express points of view on this platform so the only true strategy is recruiting enough voting power to make it no longer profitable to rape the reward pool in the manner that is currently taking place
I'm tempted to flag your comment for being so ridiculous.
This isn't about "stopping" him, it's about giving rewards back to the pool and not to a single users.
Fuck, you're clueless...
I don’t think you’re stopping anything though. My suggestion would be to use your power to upvote better posts and hope the system eventually balances out.
Edit: My new suggestion would be get Steem whales and devs to vote to create a max post payout. This way no post can be worth more than say $250.
That's not how it works. Do you think I have the time to search through a million posts every day for something worth upvoting? (Hint: I don't)
It's far easier to go flag 3 of @haejin's posts and still has the same effect.
The whales like @buildawhale and @postpromoter should do at least one flag a day, to support the fight against @haejin. That would massively help us out.
One way encourages, the other discourages. If you don’t have the time ask for curation help. If minnows see good content they’ll stay if they see flag wars they might not. It’s why Reddit isn’t worth billions but something like Instagram or Twitter is.
I actually appreciate this reply very much. I believe you. I think this demonstrates a tiny flaw in the thinking of the devs when they created the system we enjoy today, and that flaw is stated in your comment, and has enormous repercussions that include votebots, circlejerks, and selfvotes, amongst other problems.
What about being willing to accept a lower ROI for your holdings, by delegating them in moderate chunks to creators/curators you've come to believe have their heads on straight in exchange for such curation rewards as are generated by those delegations?
If you made 100 ~5k delegations (dunno if you can do that. Never looked at your wallet. It's an easy number to work with, tho) you'd retain title to the SP, so capital gains would inure to you. You'd gain curation rewards, though far less rewards than you could generate by self voting.
Most importantly, the rewards you eschewed by delegating to creators you support would be doled out to thousands of accounts that you don't have to curate personally, and encourage them to stick with Steemit--thus creating a growing market for Steem, and potentiating capital gains.
Also, a severe drawback to you would be that you wouldn't be seen as such a lightning rod. You wouldn't generate so much attention to your (mis)deeds. Since you wouldn't be selfvoting, or circlejerking, you wouldn't be able to be derided for it.
Maybe you could live with that.
Ain't tellin' you what to do. But if a gaggle of whales could resolve to accept a lower ROI in exchange for a far greater potential to moon Steem by making many moderate delegations to content creators they personally vet and select, then I don't see a downside for the platform.
I confess here that I am a recipient of such a delegation, and the delegator has neither charged any rental, nor even asked me if I wanted it. I have found that my impact on the community has multiplied, although I have made every effort to maintain exactly the same practices as I did prior to the delegation.
Many of the former delegates of @fulltimegeek, @stellabelle, and @aggroed would probably verify their performance improved as a result of the delegations they received. @abh12345 could provide stats that show those performance improvements.
I have long railed against bots voting on philosophical grounds, but economic grounds are becoming more obvious now, and I am very confident that such moderate delegations would outperform all the claimed platform benefits of votebots, while only decreasing the ROI of the delegators, not ending it.
It seems obvious that compromise between polarized positions might be necessary in this issue, and a compromise that best potentiates the platform to appreciate the price of Steem that which best effects the long term benefits to whales.
What do you think?
Remind me to read this again tomorrow when I'm sober.
But, in the meantime, how do you suggest I find 50, or 100 worthwhile Steemians to delegate to?a . That's quite a feat. Time is money. And, I value my time.
(upvoting this because some turd is going to give me a $5 flag later on)
I threw out a number. I reckon you have plenty of folks you follow, or who follow you, whose views you value. Start with one.
Go from there at your convenience. The real trick is going to be getting others to go along. Getting the YOY retention rate up is probably the most important thing that can be done to put upwards pressure on Steem in the long run, and that will require both decrease in financial manipulation and increasing the reach across the platform of rewards to new and quality users.
Here's a reminder: read this tomorrow when you're sober =p
flag done, glad to hear you have a drinking problem as well it explains a lot.
What’s that? I can’t see your comment, it was hidden...
You could just upvote all my post because haejin loves to waste his flags on me. That's guaranteed to hurt him. LOLz Less VP he has less he can SELF UPVOTE.
The whales like @buildawhale and @postpromoter should do at least one flag a day, to support the fight against @haejin. That would massively help us out.
Follow @ocd's resteems then, go upvote those posts.
What's your excuse now?
I don't follow shit guilds anymore...
Why?
YES PLEASE!!!!! I miss that. Please. I am begging.... Give me those fucking bot scripts & Ill do it. I will destroy that fucking asshole!!!!