You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A MESSAGE TO @newflash, A SOCK-PUPPET ACCOUNT OF @transisto: Stop Downvoting My Posts And Acting Like A Sociopathic/Socialist Whale!!
My problem is no so much that you self upvote, that you self upvote through sock-puppet or that you self up vote through sock-puppet is a stealth way just before payout.
Yet your explanation for downvoting revolves a lot around self voting.
@snowflake @freeyourmind and @someonewhoisme are all managed by me, @mindhunter is definetely not my account else I would have voted this account long before. It's very obvious that I am not self voting and that @mindhunter is a different person. Have a look through my posts please.
Mindhunter pays you a share of the reward from your upvotes. That mean you are not actually curating anything but voting his content regardless of quality for profit, which is what I define as selfish pool raping.
On his side @Mindhunter is producing a many post of dubious quality because he knows he's going to get it up-voted irregardless.
Doesn't take a genius to figure the scheme out.
That's the same issue with @randowhale @booster @bellyrub @discordia and all others. They all do the same. They upvote automatically any type of content. If you want to fix the world you should start from the top - the bigger pool drainers
So he is effectively buying votes from whales, not different from all the vote buying scheme on steemit..everyone is here to make money and preventing the biggest stake holders to earn is a stupid thing to do.
If investors can't mine without getting their 'machine shut down' then they aren't going to invest in the first place. Remember blogging is the new mining, some people just want to mine they don't care or don't have time to post life stories on a social media site...
Seems to be working for stocks, other cryptos, and various and traditional other investment vehicles, through the time honored mechanism of capital gains. Steem was actually mined for a brief time prior to the creation of Steemit, so mining the rewards pool isn't really mining at all.
Do let me know how selling votes is mining? Actual mining increases the amount of currency, whether gold coins or cryptohashes. Selling votes simply redirects currency into the wallets of those concerned.
As for those that just want to drain the rewards pool, and lack interest in actually contributing valuable content, well, I await with bated breath the opportunity to avoid them in their droves.
Steem is around ~$1 presently. BTC is ~$4k. Were Steem to reach but 1% of BTC's valuation, investors would realize 4000% returns on present holdings of Steem. Since I reckon the most salient factor in why Steem doesn't rapidly appreciate and exceed the value of BTC is the perception of unfairness and rampant scamming of the rewards system, it is exactly profiteering such as you are conducting that is preventing the vastly superior returns capital gains offers investors.
I just want the censoring and propaganda mills like Gargle, Fakebook, and Twatter to die, so that free speech, and the felicity of good governance that informs, can ensue.
I reckon that more valuable to me than mere money.
Mining essentially means creating new money. Witnesses are the block producers so technically they are the one putting these new coins into existance but steem users allocate them.
They are competing to earn those new issued coins, exactly like miners do. And the more they invest the more reward they receive.
So you think only users who contribute valuable content are entitled to rewards?
The flaws of Steemit were not all apparent to the developers, who are only human after all. Certainly they envisioned an imperfect distribution of rewards, intending for ~90% of rewards to inure to ~30% of the accounts.
Instead, their inability to perfectly predict human behaviour has resulted in ~99% of rewards inuring to ~1% of accounts. This was not their intention, and they clearly state that in the white paper.
That is exactly the purpose of rewards, according to the white paper, which explains why the developers set things up the way they did.
Valuable content, and the curators that promote it, are rewarded, as the very and sole purpose of rewards on Steemit.
The rewards pool was not envisioned to be a form of dividend for investors, but rather they state in the white paper that the greater ability to curate good content, per the subjective and personal preferences of those with substantial holdings of SP, was the intended reward.
They specifically state that the perception of financial manipulation - and clearly vote selling is exaclty that - is an existential threat to Steemit.
Miners do not compete for issued coins. They compete to ISSUE the coins. Mining did occur on Steem, and is the source of the majority of Steem today. Those mined coins are intended to be distributed through curation.
Not through botnets, selfvoting, or vote selling.
truth 😉
Thank you!!!! I agree
Really? Because I am actually enjoying sharing my creativity.....in a place where I'm actually meeting tons of people who are "like minded." So much drama and this is the problem that money creates......why can't it just be about everyone getting a fair share of the pie and live in harmony?