Could you even get a clue that I explained a scenario when a person invests $400 and $2 a day in blogging effort, so basically they have risked nearly nothing for the shot at up to a $million in 5 years. How the heck do you compute that as irresponsible?
Perhaps my follow up comments will give you slightly higher reading comprehension than you were able to achieve when you apparently did not read my blog post carefully and entirely.
This blog post is chock full of research on the specifics of the design and funding model. I am amazed to read that you found no value in my past week of intense research and discussion focused solely on Steem which is summarized to some degree in this blog post. I am a blockchain developer and I work full-time on this sort of stuff. I really do not appreciate your snide, flippant, and incorrect remark.
Please be more circumspect. We and Streemit will not benefit from strife and flame wars.
I am also skeptical of whether Steemit can be sustainable, which is what I explained in the section about the funding model. Yet I also recognize that this is a paradigm-shift that has the potential overtake social networking if they can use their wealth to develop something very diverse and capturing many transactions. They obviously do not plan to stay stuck only on blogging. Perhaps you should do some research about the other features and ecosystem projects they are working on. They are loaded with $millions of capital now to pay for development.
It is just irresponsible shilling. Read your posts again lol.
Could you even get a clue that I explained a scenario when a person invests $400 and $2 a day in blogging effort, so basically they have risked nearly nothing for the shot at up to a $million in 5 years. How the heck do you compute that as irresponsible?
Explain why it is irresponsible? Develop your argument with a detailed explanation. Who am I responsible for? Do you mean to imply that readers are too stupid to analyze my blog post and make their own decision of the merits? Thus I am responsible for them as if they are my children?
I don’t see what is irresponsible in terms of explaining the different ways the Steem investment can be analyzed. The entire point of discussion is to consider various perspectives.
Rather I think the issue here is you are a troll who can’t make a cogent point. Are you advocating not explaining to people about the compounding feature of Steem? Are you advocating not presenting the market capitalization of Facebook as a comparison? And why?
Could you even get a clue that I explained a scenario when a person invests $400 and $2 a day in blogging effort, so basically they have risked nearly nothing for the shot at up to a $million in 5 years. How the heck do you compute that as irresponsible?
Perhaps my follow up comments will give you slightly higher reading comprehension than you were able to achieve when you apparently did not read my blog post carefully and entirely.
I suggest you read the following three:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@anonymint/it-s-so-easy-to-become-a-millionaire-with-steem#@anonymint/re-syadastinasti-re-anonymint-it-s-so-easy-to-become-a-millionaire-with-steem-20160722t022037599z
https://steemit.com/steemit/@anonymint/it-s-so-easy-to-become-a-millionaire-with-steem#@anonymint/re-magdalena-re-anonymint-it-s-so-easy-to-become-a-millionaire-with-steem-20160721t220901401z
https://steemit.com/steemit/@anonymint/it-s-so-easy-to-become-a-millionaire-with-steem#@anonymint/re-aaseb-re-anonymint-it-s-so-easy-to-become-a-millionaire-with-steem-20160721t213537359z
This blog post is chock full of research on the specifics of the design and funding model. I am amazed to read that you found no value in my past week of intense research and discussion focused solely on Steem which is summarized to some degree in this blog post. I am a blockchain developer and I work full-time on this sort of stuff. I really do not appreciate your snide, flippant, and incorrect remark.
Please be more circumspect. We and Streemit will not benefit from strife and flame wars.
I am also skeptical of whether Steemit can be sustainable, which is what I explained in the section about the funding model. Yet I also recognize that this is a paradigm-shift that has the potential overtake social networking if they can use their wealth to develop something very diverse and capturing many transactions. They obviously do not plan to stay stuck only on blogging. Perhaps you should do some research about the other features and ecosystem projects they are working on. They are loaded with $millions of capital now to pay for development.
". We and Streemit will not benefit from strife and flame wars." Exactly.
It is just irresponsible shilling. Read your posts again lol.
Could you even get a clue that I explained a scenario when a person invests $400 and $2 a day in blogging effort, so basically they have risked nearly nothing for the shot at up to a $million in 5 years. How the heck do you compute that as irresponsible?
Explain why it is irresponsible? Develop your argument with a detailed explanation. Who am I responsible for? Do you mean to imply that readers are too stupid to analyze my blog post and make their own decision of the merits? Thus I am responsible for them as if they are my children?
I don’t see what is irresponsible in terms of explaining the different ways the Steem investment can be analyzed. The entire point of discussion is to consider various perspectives.
Rather I think the issue here is you are a troll who can’t make a cogent point. Are you advocating not explaining to people about the compounding feature of Steem? Are you advocating not presenting the market capitalization of Facebook as a comparison? And why?