So I am new to Steemit and have little knowledge regarding this. What I did do was read the white paper regarding the concept as originally presented. Now having read @ats-david's article and the white paper I have to ask, how is what he is describing not considered the very collusion addressed in the paper? Granted the paper concedes that this is not preventable by any means except other whales negative-voting the person gaming the system, so I have no role in correcting this. But it is in the best interests of the community if the whales work against this, at least in my opinion and the opinion of the paper.
Having said that, if Steemit appears to be a circle jerk where whales are voting to put steem in their own pockets eventually the smaller marine life will simply give up and move on to other venues, making the currency essentially worthless. I will trust the market forces to prevail in the end. So I ask, why is ats-david getting negative votes from the folks heavily invested in steem? Wouldn't his work be benefiting you by protecting your investments?
Just the thoughts of a newbie trying to figure out the politics of all of this.
Well said.
ONLY THE WHALES CAN POLICE THE WHALES
You hit the nail on the head!
That's right. This type of collusion among whale voters can only be negated by equal or more powerful whales. That's why it's important for this platform to have those balances - especially at the top. The bad actors need to be identified so that the community can decide how to deal with them - but ultimately, if they are some of the most powerful, then the decision to counter their behavior lies in the hands of very few people.
I'm getting the flags from the very people who are colluding with each other in order to prop up the accounts mentioned in my post. That information on collusion will be presented in future posts.