RE: How to Allocate the Worlds Resources Fairly
This only works assuming you have some way to prevent people from basically taking over and destroying the delicate balance needed to get such a feat accomplished.
While all this is fine and dandy to dream about the harsh reality is that the utopias you lay out in your posts would have to see a complete overthrow of the 1%, all world governments as well as a complete reprogramming of human nature.
It's fun to dream about utopias.. But can we focus on making our own society, here, now more supporting of those helping build it rather than making examples of folks and smashing the morale of people who've done nothing but dedicate their past months time to the cause?
These posts of yours are great ideas but I'm calling it right now that most of them are extremely overvalued and likely people are just piling on votes in hopes of curation rewards without actually reading what you set fourth.
I love a lot of your ideas Dan.. But on the flip side to that, a lot of it is just extremely overvalued fluff with literally no bearing or footing in reality as it currently sits.
Do you really need to accept SBD payouts on these posts of yours?
Nah, You're set for life with the amount of STEEM you all managed to grab on the second launch of STEEM.. You have to sort of ask yourself one thing.. Are you bringing value to the network with this utopian fluff posting or merely using your reputation on the site as developer to grab a chunk of the daily reward pool?
This is me merely thinking out loud.. I'm 100% certain I'm not the only one with these thoughts in mind as well. Please don't take this as me attacking your ideas or thoughts. As mentioned earlier some of them are wonderful.
(Seems weird to me, you've already got enough STEEM and SBD to take us to 1 satoshi, what purpose do these posts actually serve besides easy curation rewards and ego stroking as the masses mindlessly pile on votes? Would this post not serve the same function of idea sharing if it was a 0 payout post?)
I'm going to quibble on one point (which I've brought up before). No one is voting on these posts for the curation rewards because they won't get any. Since Dan self-votes and has high SP, that reallocates essentially all the curation rewards to the author. Even in the case of bots, by now most bots (and/or the people running them) are smart enough to know that high-SP early votes kill the curation rewards and not to vote on these posts to earn. People may be voting out of loyalty, or laziness (if Dan wrote it, it must be worthwhile), or perhaps they actually find value. But it isn't for curation rewards.
So it's all basically for a circle jerk? Or are people voting on these things expecting a reward but in turn getting axed because of the way it's run?
I bet you people are voting on these posts for perceived curation rewards.. And if what you've written above is true the rabbit hole just gets deeper and uglier. -_-
We can't really prove why people (and/or the bots they control) are voting in any particular instance, but I seriously doubt that to any significant degree significant stakeholders or bots run by significant stakeholders are still making such a costly error as to vote for these posts for the purpose of earning curation rewards. Seven months is long enough for people with real money at stake to figure out how the system actually operates. Dust votes may be, but that's not where the rewards are coming from.
It seems to fall somewhere between popularity votes, misplaced idea of getting rewardd for upvoting it or simply mindless upvoting for our fearless Dev.
Either way I'm sort of thinking it's a wee bit laughable at this point on both dan's and the communities behalf that we're just circle jerking some of the highest level account holders into positions where they can collect more money to dump on the market later after they announce news to stimulate buys.
I honestly hope I'm just looking into this all far to much and seeing things that perhaps are figments of my imagination.. Sadly I don't think this is the case though.
Umm are u sure. I was not aware. I still vote on these for curation rewards.
It would really be nice if we could understand how curation works.
If you look on steemd.com for this post in advanced mode you wll see this line:
author_curate_reward 96.06%That means that due to early voting (primarily Dan's instant self-vote), 96% of what would otherwise have been curation rewards are redirected to the author. All the other curators are splitting 4% (of 25% of the post value so 1% of the post value). If you aren't one of the first voters and aren't a whale, you will be getting dust or more likely nothing at all.
You can go and study the math and the code or you can simply try to use curation rewards as they were intended. Find posts that have been active for at least 30 minutes, don't have a lot of voting, and have the potential to become popular and get voted. If you do that you will earn significant curation rewards. If you pile on to posts like this one you will not.
It is perfectly reasonable to just vote for what you like, even if you vote late and get no curation rewards. That serves to incentivize other curators following the process in the previous paragraph to find it for you and make it more visible to you.
Thank you smooth
This wasn't intended as a burn or diss to dan. (regardless of how it may read I've no ill will here)
I'm raising issues I see in the public eye rather than just throwing flags at stuff that I believe isn't worth the current payout. If I have to be "that guy" and speak on behalf of people whom are to afraid to speak against the developers then so be it.
At the end of the day I'm merely speaking my mind. Just as dan is in this post.. The only difference is I'm not milking my rockstar developer status and taking in pay that I really don't need in the slightest.
I do find it a bit unfortunate that he is #9 in posting rewards for this account alone (#39 for @dan). He already has all the steem... he doesnt need any more, and his own self vote is a thumb on the scale that weighs the value of posts against each other. These posts could certainly decline payout... especially given the seemingly endless procession of psuedo-intellectual musings that they represent.
Nothing but greed and embezzlement by people who frankly have more than enough to live off of forever..
Then to have the audacity to shovel bullshit psuedo-intellectual to STEEM knowing full well that people upvote everything you touch simply out of perceived curation rewards..
What the f**k... -_-
Everyone who posts on Steemit has the right to the following options: accept, decline, or SP payout.
Yes, That is why I am still scratching my head as to why payouts are accepted at all by folks who've got accounts that basically have the ability to put anyone into a top 19 witness spot at anytime.
I find it extremely confusing and disheartening that our community is upvoting these basic income posts without actually reading them.. The worst part is though (in my opinion) is that it's basically needless income on the author's behalf.
How much does one person need? I guess it's only up to that person to decide how much they think is fair to take out of the reward pool as they see fit.
Am I wrong to write this post and bring my thoughts into the public eye? Perhaps, But it's certainly more soothing to write down my feelings rather than bottle them up and suffer silently with my own conscience.
Anybody voting after Dan will have so small percentage of the curation rewards, that it would be foolish to do it for self-interest.
Just look at the percentages in advanced mode on steemd
You are arguing for basic income rights in a way, yourself ;)
Only time will tell.. there's intent - expressed and intrinsic. People can claim whatever they want in the short term. But true agendas like trust is only expressed over time.
Is it really necessary? Wouldn't it work even if just a subset of humanity agreed on this? How big a portion of humanity would be necessary for it to work? I am curious what @dantheman thinks about this..
You have 3 distinct types of people in western societies:
It's pretty easy to see that unless you're govt or already rich and 1% you're already getting f**ked from 2 directions. You take out the 1% and those capitalizing off the people through business what you're left with is the consumer. If he's not being taken advantage of and exploited by business and govt the consumer can actually flourish in most cases.
I speak as a man who lives just outside of societies norm. I'm self employed, Don't pay income tax and I certainly don't expect a handout from a govt I'd like to see dismantled .
End of the day it's all fine and dandy to post stuff like "How to Allocate the worlds resources fairly" but when you're actually doing the opposite of what's being posted by reputation farming and knowing full well people will vote basically whatever you write and accepting payouts for it? Cmon...
What is your reasoning behind this Dan? You've got enough to retire wealthy. Do you really need to be dipping into the reward pool too knowing full well people upvote you regardless of if your post actually is feasible or realistic?
If you're going to post stuff like this I'd love to read it, But preferably I'd like to see you not accepting payouts on your posts... Because lets face it. You're the 1% on STEEM and watching you constantly drink your fill and then some not only gets tiring but also speaks volumes of what's actaully going on...
You can post all the feel good pseudo love fluff you want, But when you, as an extremely high powered account owned by a developer just keeps coming back over and over dropping whatever grand delusion of equality, all while having already taken massive helpings off the get go and just continually posting utopian "help everyone" posts while actually taking money out of people's hard earned rewards... You're STEEM'ing wrong and frankly you need to consider the PR angle on this stuff man.
Who want's to be part of a platform where the Developer can post a fart and make hundreds which in turn devalues your post? If you're going to preach equality perhaps consider your role in the ecosystem and realize your pockets are already as fattened as they should be.
(I'm still a firm believer the STEEM devs deserve mad pay for their work... But at the expense of our other posters? Did you not get enough on the second launch? )
You don't have to vote for Dan. You can also buy all the steem and then decide who gets how much.
instead of hating on productive people maybe just accept the fact that in this world the strong reap the rewards.
Your categorization above is completely out of whack by the way.