You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Haejin Relaxo VIDEO HD
Well, for one, @fyrstikken doesn't bot his own stuff 10 times a day as far as I could tell.
Well, for one, @fyrstikken doesn't bot his own stuff 10 times a day as far as I could tell.
No fyrstikken asks everyone else for money to vote on them with his bot. How does that differ?
He runs a business? Nobody forced you to use @booster or @speedvoter did it? If @fyrstikken posted everyday and used @booster to upvote all his posts/comments, then I will agree with you.
He uses his bot to downvote, meaning everyone who uses the bit bot gets a lower return. But that aside. How does it differ.
If I vote on myself with a vote of 1 STU
Or I send 1 steem and get a vote of 2.50 STU (loosing the 0.50 curration). And giving 1 steem.
What diffrence does it make? I get the same vote, so in essence i am draining the same pool. How would you all feel if Haejin would send all the bots 50 - 100 steem and get upvotes of 100 - 200?
Now see it from a bot owners percpective. We use the bot. We over vote, so the bot owner is winning money. Het gets his steem instantly, no risk for downvotes :D.
In essence he is not earning 100% of the potential and i know that but fyrstikken is using his bot for downvoting aswell. Wich potentianly opens everyone who uses it up for downvotes from whoever is using the bot.
In essence we are all abusing the system. I don't think vote bots where a intent of the creators of steem.
Trash trending posts receive downvotes. Who the heck expect to gain major returns from bid bots? It's an advertising tool. You are supposed to fish for the big whale votes with money spent on the bid bots.
Bot owners should down vote as needed because given their massive SP, they need to stand up for content standard as well. Whether that comes in the form of blacklist, whitelist, etc. it's an evolving system.
Until @ned, STINC, et al come in and say no, even then, your "intent" of the creators serves no purpose as far as the point of an OPEN platform.
He got 480 STU from bit bots.
Content standard? You call a video where is swears and act all mighty and strong good content? He actualy said in a diffrent post he would swim to wherever heajin lives and murder him and eat his heart. This kind of behavior should be downvoted aswell.
It aint because you have lots of steem you can act like a dictator.
Instead you should work on a solution so things like this can not happen in the future. Downvoting does not solve the issue. It only means you drain your own pool. Which is fine by me. But there are people around who actualy think of ways that things like that can no longer happen. But kids yell fire and run a diffrent direction. Or yell they gonna smack the big bully who does not do what they like.
a example of a good idea
Most customers don't get that 100% @booster vote. Also, let's not conveniently forget the fact that the man is a sponsor for contents and projects on the platform.
What does @haejin do? To Bitshares/Bittrex they go! Even @berniesanders, who many despise, happen to delegate to worthwhile projects.
Totaly true, but that is not what my initial comment was about. I agree with fyrstikken i just don't like the way he said it. It was disrespectfull. And even when you are offended and you dispise someone you always handle them like you want to be spoken to
Different strokes for different folks.
He loses points for professionalism, but gains some in being relatable. Can't say you are wrong for not agreeing with his tone.
So, after like 15 notifications from your edits, that's all you have to say?
Have you seen what @haejin wrote before he received the @booster smack down? Honestly, that is the most mild video I have seen of @fyrstikken just from what I could dig up quickly in 5 minutes.
Like what? I don't like this type of generic answers. People here are operating based on the system that's set in place.
Until you find a way to convince STINC or tunnel your way into the Top 20, that talk is not only cheap, but meaningless. I saw your "good idea". It is a good idea, but how and when will it be implemented? If there is a huge road block, then we are back at square one. Good ideas have been discussed to death on places like @steemstarnetwork. The problem has ALWAYS been implementation.
What do normal users like me do? We use what the system has already placed.
Maybe you should stay on the dev side of things as it is your expertise?
Yes you start a war that can never be won. Today you strike down haejin and tommorow someone else. What will you solve? Why is your view better then those of others? Why is downvoting solving this issue, it clearly is not is it? I agree haejins posts are useless and are just made to upvote himself. But if the system allows it someone somewhere will do it.
So instead of yelling fire use the money at your disposal to develop something to help solve the issue. Just yelling and complaining does not solve anything.
It's to ease the symptoms until "geniuses" like you can actually implement your features after going through the hurdles.
Or, we can let the likes of @haejin go and collapse the platform; rendering me correct and all your ideas meaningless because Steemit would be dead when everyone leaves.
That is true, "as far as you could tell." However, under the current rules of the blockchain, who or what could stop @fyrstikken if he did decide that he wanted to upstroke himself 10x's every day, just like @haejin does??? Or, how do you know that they are not both one-and-the-same person, since everyone can create multiple accounts and there is no way to ensure a persons' identity and that each person only has one account?
Multiple accounts is a HUGE red flag to me, and it allows people to "game the system" that SteemIt has put into place. It provides an environment which makes it easy for people to hide their activities and hide behind false identities. Why would people want to have fake identities? Is it because they don't want other people to know what they are really doing?
Answer: only a group of other whales could stop this from happening. So, why did the whales allow @haejin to make $200K off of SteemIt, and are only now getting around to addressing this apparent "problem?" Why do such a small group of people seem to have all of the "power" in this supposedly "fair" system??? Is SteemIt truly "decentralized" or does all of the power go hand-in-hand with a minority of super-rich technocrats ??? Is this a system of governance which is preferable to the systems which we already have in place? Or, is this just a case of, "different boss, same rules?"
Has SteemIt really been able to address its' own fundamental questions? Or, is it a failed experiment? Can it still be salvaged by some tweaks to the blockchain? If so, why haven't these tweaks been made yet? Do the Witnesses really want to make SteemIt a fair place, with fair rules? Or, do they want to make it appear to be fair, so they can keep on gaming the system they have put in place - and beat down anyone who threatens to usurp the power they already have???
All I can say is, you better start voting. Not just upvotes and downvotes, but also for Witnesses.
And the serious whales have reasons to not play the "golden parachute" like @haejin.
My witness votes have been in place, and have been "adjusted," since... about June, 2017 - just as soon as I joined SteemIt and educated myself about voting for witnesses. The only question is, does my voting have any effect? I honestly don't know that it does, one way of the other.
Why have these "serious whales" allowed @haejin to exercise this, "golden parachute" option - for the last few months? If they were so "serious," wouldn't they have stopped @haejin somewhere around $20K, instead of $200K ??? Or, could they have been 10 times more "serious" about exercising their resposibility to keep SteemIt a fair place?
Is there anything put into place to address the next "rape of the rewards pool" which is almost certainly in planning or has already launched? Or, are there already thousands of similar situations already going on, which nothing is being done to correct? Or, is @haejin just the most glaring example of somebody who has successfully "out-gamed" the whales who are already gaming us?
If self-promotion is "against the rules," why don't the Witnesses change this situation for everyone, ensure a "one person, one account" system, and clean things up? Or, did Dan Larimer leave the SteemIt platform because there are "unfixable" problems that are already hard-coded into the SteemIt blockchain, and he's going to try and do a better job with EOS and SteemIt 2.0?
Currently, Witness vote weight is all about SP. I do recall @ned mentioning about changing it. You can see the overall layout here.
http://www.steemreports.com/witness-voters/
The report gets rid of the proxies I believe, so it's basically how the SPs weight all distributed among the top Witnesses. The website also has sections for the lower 50s, etc.
Also note that I believe a significant of Steemians DO NOT vote.
I can see that I still have a lot to learn, and my questions are many. The only real pathway for me seems to be, "Keep Swimming, and Be Careful."
And really, most of your other questions can be found by visiting @paulag's blog for her stats. In short, there are upcoming @haejin's and many tiny circlejerk rings.
I get daily messages from Steem.chat about vote for vote.
As for @dan, the history is carved into the blockchain, you can read about why he left.
As for why did whales, et al wait? Again, Witness voting distribution should have answered most of that question.
It's very possible that it's a group of whales that funded rancho and haejin in the first place, in order to create a fall guy that cashes out mercilessly and with maximum efficiency, so that they can make money without any apparent ties to the scheme. And as long as some people at some times appear to be doing something about "individuals" like him engaging in such behavior then less attention is given to the witnesses who could actually change the whole system at the code-level to be less profit-driven. The same witnesses who are backed by some of the same whales who are doing this in the first place.
Exactly my thoughts. I have no idea if they're accurate, but it would not surprise me - in the least - if something very close to this is actually what @ranchorelaxo and some other whales all had in mind to begin with.