You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Singing In The Shower
just want to add that despite all the negative things I said above, I still think Steem is a worthwhile investment
just want to add that despite all the negative things I said above, I still think Steem is a worthwhile investment
Not one bot will get you 94% return, not even close. The best ones you'll get nearer to 80% that's if you're lucky because they're up and down. Your performance is truly impressive and I applaud your system, you're better than a bot. I like you, I like the stuff that you do I know you support funny to a degree, I certainly wouldn't be where I am without your support early on, it's nice knowing a whale has your support.
You think with you 0.26% of steem you can't change this place? You must be in finance because you certainly can't see the wood from the trees. By your same logic #comedyopenmic shouldn't exist. With 24,000 SP DJ and I pulled a rabbit, we created something people really enjoy and we hope is making steemit a better place. But who cares about that right? You can do a lot with your SP other than to reward yourself.
You claim 60% of people do what you're doing, if that was the case steem would crash and burn. I could go through and create a pretty graph and prove your figures are wrong but we both know they are. I don't mean the steem price I mean the blockchain, this would be a ghost town. But If your goal was to just get a return on investment, create 1 post and upvote it 100%, then just comment on that post with a "." and upvote that 100% every 2.4hrs. Hell, I could create a bot for you to do that.
You say you're an investor in steem but you're not. Not really. You invested in steem in the start and now you justify sucking it dry because there are some guys who are bigger than you, well I'm sure you've been in a locker room before... There's always someone bigger. Steem isn't just a crypto currency, it's a platform. The guy who created DTube invested and continues to invest in steem, the Dapps coming out, they're investments in steem. You just bought some steem. You want a bigger picture: Steem at $100. You personally could be responsible for increasing the steem price by $20 through an investment to create the next DTube or Dmania or Appics or Busy.org or...
We've been down this road before, we both know you're wrong, but you want to get to 1mil steem to be able to defend yourself from attacks. But invest in something, and you can build an army to defend you. Don't want to build it yourself? Fine then go find something and delegate. Don't just suck steem dry,
Contribute!!
Delegate 20,30,40% of your SP (Hell anything!) to a project that makes steemit a better place. Help Steem, this is platform where communities thrive and individuals bleed out. Help create a community and when the 1.2mil wolf knocks on your door 1000 people answer. That is your protection. That is how you invest in Steem, if you believe in it.
On efficiency of bots: my understanding is most buyers pay a little more than the value of the votes they buy for the exposure which yields over 100%. This lower bound is auto correcting as it's the risk of steem price dropping in 7 days vs the benefits of exposure. Even at 80%, it seems like a pretty good deal for doing absolutely nothing. They're also perfectly efficient in managing their voting power, which means delegations to bidding bots drain the voting pool more than any manual voter.
60% of all people is a complete misquote. I said I've read it's around 30% of SP and rising. Which equates to ~60% if you discount the stake controlled by Steemit Inc. Whatever the aggregate amount of SP in all known bots is, it's a staggering proportion of the entire pool and a problem. This doesn't include other forms of clawing back rewards including self votes, vote swaps, delegation market etc.
All this has a negative impact on Steem price. A price I'm paying as long as I'm here. It's something that can be mitigated by maximizing returns through clawing back rewards, just like with the other 30% (realistically more as it's not just bots) SP. As I argued, this is due to a flawed rewards curve.
I don't owe you any more than any other investor/miner/user in terms of votes. What is the incentive for me to personally forgo more returns than the other 30% of all SP out there? The system can't work if it requires the magnanimity of certain actors. Almost nobody is invested in crypto for altruistic reasons. The incentives must align profit maximization with behavior that's best for the the system as a whole and linear does not do this.
If I'm wrong, why is it that we both know that just throwing my SP into a voting bot is an option that's available to me? Again, the system fails if the economic incentives rely on the voluntary generosity of its actors. It thrives when actions that maximize self interest directly also maximizes the interests of the entire platform. You are basically just asking me to be more generous. Even if I oblige, which I won't, it doesn't help given the current economic ecosystem.
Putting it bluntly, all things being equal it's stupid of me to invest in an economic ecosystem where 30% of SP is just mindlessly clawing back its stake through rewards. But it's even more stupid to find yourself invested there, pay the price (through a shitty trending page, bad content discovery, therefore lower steem price) and forgo these returns. It's also unreasonable for others to ask me to forgo them. When you're not antagonizing me directly, can you see the economics of this?
If the economic incentives are fixed (I blame linear, but i'm open to other suggestions), I'm more than happy to support a lot of other content as I had for 8 months before. But when 30%+ and growing of SP are maximizing their returns, I can't afford/am unwilling to do otherwise as I'll just incur a personal loss for nothing.
While not directly relevant, most (all?) of the projects you listed are heavily reliant on immense delegations and are not without their own controversy/problems/abuse.
I think this is a crappy way of thinking. I was raised to lead by example. This is not a leaders mindset. It reminds me of someone who says that a specific contest they stopped running was costing them. Costing what? Self-votes (or lack thereof). They weren't losing money or sending via transfers. It was upvotes.
I'm pretty sure the upvote recharges so it can't possibly cost you.
I've never invested anything I can't afford to lose, so if you have to upvote yourself 94% because the struggle is so real I'm sorry but you're failing somewhere.
It must really suck to be a millionaire.
You still don't believe, let me give you an example.
@groovatti joined steem specifically to participate in #comedyopenmic.
Read his #comedyopenmic entry
Now imagine 1000 new people of this calibre on steem, that is what will make you a $100 Millionaire, that's your fucking economic incentive, but you prefer sit in a corner gratifying yourself.
I can't in good conscience allow you to continue doing this without opposition.
Can't say I didn't try convince you to change... twice now.