RE: Is steem social or antisocial network?
I have a hard time completely seeing your logic.
Firstly, you are using boost services, so if you don't feel this aligns well with a social network, why are you using them?
I don't agree that this is a terrible example of a social ecosystem, the logic goes to shit when you are having multiple "social interactions" with people, regarding the topic of social interactions, on the blockchain that you're saying isn't social.. It really doesn't make sense to me.
It's not a perfect system, and as I previously stated, devs and community voices are working tirelessly to improve the issues with the current system.
People will do their best to help you here, but dedicated members like myself aren't very appreciative of a slanderous statement such as "this is a terrible example".. It's simply not the case, and has maintained active users since it's creation.
Try to be a little more positive bro..You're earning some Steem right? It isn't all bad..
Y foolish, y think that boost will be work infinite? Only worth is steem crypto, SBD is internal fiat, that can author cause as inflation and regulation if want. Voting power is nothing in external use. Steem crypto should be more valuable, but if anyone withdraws through, so will go down an down. People like Jarry Banfield and other whales want to tell y how help y. Instead of that they hold big bunch and grab % from all of us. But can congratulate them, they fast understand, what this system is.
I dont feel any social interaction here. Yes, my idea was earn something and i think that most people too. But feel sad and lonely in that bot machine.
If that system should have any social value, cant buy voting power, its same as do potitics. I though, that this system is different, but its social mining bot.
I am very angry and sad, what people do with bitcoin idea only for its greedy.
Yes, you touch on some valid points here, and you are not alone as far as members of Steem who feel a sense of isolation.
During market lows, we lose tons of members, because many of them are greedy, and only in this for personal gain.
There are a great deal of charitable projects happening right now. One I am currently involved with @dfacademy is completely based around the idea of utilizing crypto to help less fortunate people, and fulfill goals of our youth though the utility of the current system. We are able to pool resources to fund projects like this. This offers real use case scenarios for the world to see, where crypto is used to empower and yield opportunity. To me, this is what it's all about, and these kind of initiatives are popping up left and right here.
The idea of buying stake power doesn't sound bad to me, if it's used properly in all cases, but we know that this will never be the case, and people using accounts for "miners" has also always been an issue. There are some services here to combat spam and abuse, but they can only do so much. Resource tokens were supposed to help, but really didn't, because it doesn't take much Steem to render them useless as a limiting transactor.
I think we need more people in this space who question the current implementations, because that is kind of the entire point of the decentralized "social" environment.
A serious problem indeed. I think a system where users remove "some" is not as bad as a system where complete power downs are sent out.. This increases the output to an insane amount, and compounds the issue. Now if users only ever sent out their "liquid" rewards, (and not all of the time), I don't think the impact would be at all as bad if people kept their stakes locked up, but again.. if you don't agree with stake, the entire idea implodes and it's hard to really think of solutions. The entire system would need to be revamped, and if the vote power isn't in the hands of the people (if there even is vote power) would be like a version of Facebook where the company only could vote, and would be biased, essentially recreating what we are trying to refashion entirely.
I must leave for a bit, so I might not be able to respond again until tomorrow.
I hope your sadness and loneliness goes away.
You're voice has value my man, and I'm sure you have some friends on this blockchain that you haven't even met yet!
Take care @ftoz
There are some nice features, but to complete justice rules idea has far from. PoS has globaly several problems, coins are cumulated at master nodes. Later it sucks all network. Here is similar problem like master nodes. Several people can sucks all network. Bad is that they are confident to help you, but suck network. I see some whales video and they talk that content does matter. If use bots, content doesnt matter and matter only understanding bot tracker. Fair play has no chance here to succeed.
You are absolutely correct, and Resource Credits do nothing to circumvent the problem as far as I can see.
Spot on .
I believe it does, however it will take masses of new users who don't want a bot system, and people will need to completely ignore the bot services, rendering them useless. This is difficult because as long as the bots exist people are going to use them.
Bid bots I see to be a major problem, especially considering the fixed ROI's. Spending 100 dollars for a 10 dollar profit might not seem like a big deal, but it's effectively making the wealth gap huge, and most of the bidders continue the process and send out Steem to the exchanges. Terrible.
I'm a little biased with the entire system. Although I don't think bid bots are good, I don't think fixed rate bots are nearly as bad, and in some cases, maybe even good. For example @ocdb is a fixed rate whitelist bot which only allows members who are deemed to create quality content by the community. What this does is ensures they are earning what others feel they should on all of their posts.
One might say well why not just support a user constantly if you think they have good content. A valid question, but if you are not using automation it's near impossible to keep up with all of your associates ona constant basis here. So while a person might make 10 dollars on a post, the next post might only make 10 cents because they were missed by a supporter who is a whale. The fixed rate whitelist bot helps them ensure they are earning regularly according to the opinions of others.
I see systems like this to have what could be detrimental aspects, but it's also a counter balance against the bid based bots. Now quality content providers don't have to turn to bidding, or at least are less tempted to. It's hard to think this is a perfect system when it's based off of opinion. For example, I've seen some members whitelisted by the bot who I don't feel create good enough content to be whitelisted, and then I start feeling like I am being overlooked by the curators because I work hard and create what I feel to be intelligible material, but you see.. that is only my opinion.. So all considered, it's hard to believe it's perfect, but still a much better alternative to the bid based bots.