Sorry, I don't feel I have enough information to take part in this vote. It was the reason I didn't vote for the steem monsters option in the last vote. When we're being asked to invest such a large amount we need better information. I wouldn't mind risking 500 steem on steem monsters but this is three times that amount. I think the last vote was problematic when we were being asked to vote for the amount and the investment at the same time, but the two different variables were not related to each other. In future, can we keep them as separate votes and then, when we have chosen the amount, we can decide on the investment (or vice versa).
If there is more voting weight abstaining or not participating than there is for any one of the options offered, this vote should be null and start again.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
hey, sometimes i takes me a few days to get caught up. I think we should just let this one go and do the next one better. I agree there was not alot of information but even when i was writing the voting posts i only ever included 8-10 lines on each investment, little a tester. I was thinking club members were researching stuff and learning. Sorta like investment club homework, lol :p
Next time we do an Investment vote, we can include both options for STEEM amount and investment option but change how club members vote. eg, 4 investment options are A, B, C is D and 4 STEEM amount options is 1,2,3 and 4. You decide which investment is best and how much you think is best and then just comment your vote like B2, A3 are whatever. I think each person would invest different amounts in different things and it saves time.
Yeah, I agree, that sounds like a sensible way forward ...
I voted 1500/gold last time, so not really happy to see 1500 taken as the amount but not for gold; otherwise I would have voted lowest amount/steemmonsters 😁
For someone who is not involved in steem monsters, that is quite a lot of research to take on, especially in seven days. The other options have been discussed over a period of time, not just presented in this vote, so members have had time to think about them and do any research long before having to vote. There wasn't any information about steem monsters price or pattern of growth.
If you want to continue to combine amount and option in one vote, then there needs to be a way to analyse responses accurately. I guess a table with the possible combinations 1-4 across the top and a-d down the side and the voting value for each of the combinations placed in the chart. Not sure what happens if you've got a tie 😂 Personally, I would prefer to go back to the two stage system: first we decide the amount/option; then, with one variable decided, members can decide the level of risk they want to take.
I would rather see @spinvest making good quality investments that members feel comfortable with and that accurately represents their views, than saving time.
I can't please everyone, its not that sorta service. There are over 150 investors, 40ish confirmed members and my role is to do what members vote in. I don't agree with some of the things that have won votes in the past but I understand it's not up to me. I think because SM packs won the last vote that it accurately represents that most people are comfortable with it. SM pack price charts can be found by searching 'steem-engine token charts' on steemit. This chart shows the top 30 tokens is terms of volume for a 3 month period. You can see that only 3 tokens have a plus ROI. Afitx is that daily reports thing that lots of people use and the other 2 are steem monster s tokens. Alpha packs are worth more than Beta but are not a top 30 traded token so dont appear on this list.
STEEM MONSTER pack tokens are a solid investment as far as crypto goes as we can see above that everything else is losing money apart from SM tokens and the reason why is because they are priced in dollars. Very smart move by aggroed
This is a huge point and I would like to propose that we select the investment by vote and THEN select the amount by vote in the future. Who do I recommend this to would you think? @conradsuperb?