You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: @haejin EXCEEDS 11,200 FOLLOWERS!!! THIS PROVES People Follow for GOOD CONTENT NOT BAD CONTENT!!!
Bernie downvoting you for defending haejin or expressing an opinion is not right. If it's not right when bernie does it, then it's not right when haejin does it. Bernie's motto is not "Do no harm". Downvoting a single post is one thing. Downvoting all posts for a user is another altogether (without a specific reason for each post). I know Bernie has done this. What many of you and haejin don't seem to understand is that we are not aligned. We are not sheep. I have 0 allegiance to Bernie. He has no allegiance with me. The same can be said for @themarkymark.
A post about a 100 Steem give away for charity has nothing to do with this. Downvoting such a post does harm.
As I said before, this is a problem with the steem platform. We will run in circles if we just say the problem is bernie or the problem is haejin.
I think steem would be better if there was no flagging whatsoever. It would be even better than that if rewards were based upon the quality of content rather than the spamming of bots.
That being said, Haejin is not here to harm the steem community. He is helping a great deal of people and I personally think he provides fantastic content. I am confident he would not need steem to promote himself, nor does he need the money from steem. Look at his donation addresses, he has plenty of money.
If steem will forever be dominated by whales, I hope more like haejin show up. While you see him as malicious, I see him as the best content creator on the platform. He is also building a community of people learning from him. I see no greater gift he could give me than the gift of knowledge I have received.
He may not be here to harm, but he is causing great harm. His content may be helpful to many of you, but it isn't very helpful to the Steemit community in general. Now, could that change? Yes. But based on his recent actions and stated plans, I doubt it very much. He is just as malicious as Bernie, if not more so.
The knowledge he gives is fine to give to his customers. However most of the steemit community does not want to buy his product. To retaliate against someone for not buying your product is wrong. That is what he does when he wipes out a person's earnings for downvoting one of his $1000/day posts for -.02. It is harmful. I can attest.
====Posting the rest of conversation here so people won't have to click through=====
Meh, they are really about the same right now. Both pretty bad in terms of downvotes.
The flag is necessary to judge the value of the content. I agree that his product (teaching and analysis) has potential to be useful to everyone, but not everyone wants to make use of that potential. I doubt most people would bat an eye at your upvote. This whole thing started from a single user with a +300 upvote on every one of his posts. Now, while the system allows such power over the reward pool, it does allow the steemit community a method of recourse. That recourse is the downvote. Now, it got a bit too overzealous and blanked out one or two of his posts, but that was it. While he doesn't force your vote, using his considerable influence over the reward pool would force the reward pool to pay him if the community members didn't have the ability to downvote him.
I get your guys' point though. The flag really does have a negative connotation everywhere, but it doesn't quite mean the same thing here. It really should be two different things. The flags on haejin's stuff should stop at around $120 or whatever similar post types dictate. I'm not even that upset with 200, but if they were unchecked, they would be $1000 per post, and I don't feel like that is an accurate representation of the value of that post to the community.
For example, I sell a product here on Steemit that costs 20 Steem. Now, if I accepted upvotes as payment for that product, I would be wrong. Here's why: it cost the community, not the upvoter. The funds belong to steemit and the community is given the responsibility to spend it. If they do not have the ability to counter the whims of a whale, the system will continue to be scammed.
Why is it not helpful to the steem community? Anyone can learn technical analysis, Haejin is just a very good teacher and a very good predictor.
I don't really see what his product is also, he is not forcing me to upvote or donate to him.
I agree with you that whales ability to wipe out earnings is wrong. That being said, as long as the flag is there it will be abused by anyone who has the money to abuse it. Bernie is definitely the worst though.
Meh, they are really about the same right now. Both pretty bad in terms of downvotes.
The flag is necessary to judge the value of the content. I agree that his product (teaching and analysis) has potential to be useful to everyone, but not everyone wants to make use of that potential. I doubt most people would bat an eye at your upvote. This whole thing started from a single user with a +300 upvote on every one of his posts. Now, while the system allows such power over the reward pool, it does allow the steemit community a method of recourse. That recourse is the downvote. Now, it got a bit too overzealous and blanked out one or two of his posts, but that was it. While he doesn't force your vote, using his considerable influence over the reward pool would force the reward pool to pay him if the community members didn't have the ability to downvote him.
I get your guys' point though. The flag really does have a negative connotation everywhere, but it doesn't quite mean the same thing here. It really should be two different things. The flags on haejin's stuff should stop at around $120 or whatever similar post types dictate. I'm not even that upset with 200, but if they were unchecked, they would be $1000 per post, and I don't feel like that is an accurate representation of the value of that post to the community.
For example, I sell a product here on Steemit that costs 20 Steem. Now, if I accepted upvotes as payment for that product, I would be wrong. Here's why: it cost the community, not the upvoter. The funds belong to steemit and the community is given the responsibility to spend it. If they do not have the ability to counter the whims of a whale, the system will continue to be scammed.
@moeknows You got downvoted by @haejin in one of your posts above. I believe you aimed it at @berniesanders but the message was unclear exactly whom you were addressing. So much confusion and inevitably friendly fire.
Edit: Maybe I'm the only one confused.
Nah, I'm sure he meant to give me a full 100% downvote. He has learned well from Bernie. I kind of called him out on the fact that his motto is "Do no harm" yet harm he does. Oh well, such is life. You can read the conversation below...or above...I always get mixed up where these posts end up once the flags and upvotes start getting thrown around.
Anyway feel free to join the conversation. Be careful though, there be hungry whales in the water.