You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steem Arbitrage: Flaw Or Nothing For Concern...?
The first post was incoherent nonsense and another post quoting the first post adding nothing new is building more confusion on top of nonsense. @enki's comments on the first post were correct.
Don't bother voting for this post because if I see this recycled nonsense getting big rewards I will be downvoting it.
I'm not a fan of using the downvote in that manner, but otherwise agree with what you're saying about the incoherent arguments, and I upvoted your comment so it stays up top.
Thank you for your input and explanation.
As stated, this post was intended to raise awareness to the issue - as seemed the original didnt get much attention - not for rewards.
Appreciate your perspective - given you've been around since the start and have a deep knowledge of the back end dynamics, your voice is highly valuable in the discussion to help clear up any misinformation on the matter.
also updated the post title as suggested and inspired by @pfunk & @recursive 's comments to tone down the seriousness suggested by the first headline.
Enki was correct generally speaking for abritrages. He was not correct for this specific case.... his analysis is easily disproven by market observation. If he were correct, prices would tend to meet in the middle (or at least a volume weighted middle)... they don't. The price always corrects to the (lower) external exchange price.
Don't you mean by the amount of steem (or more accurately the size of the order) rather than Steem Power/Vests?
An a example, current price on internal market is around $1.25. Let's say there is a large buy order for $1.25 and I want to "front run" (put a buy order in just above it). With an order size of 1 steem, I would need to bid $1.251 to avoid being rounded down to $1.25. If instead I place an order of 10 steem for $12.501 I can get to the front of the bids without sacrificing as much of the price.
Thus, more steem available for trading rather than SP gives an advantage in the precision to which one can place orders, no?
That said, it doesn't really seem to me like the issue here is the recycled nature of the post. There are many "hidden gems" and similar type posts designed to get attention for unnoticed posts. What it seems like to me is that you either disagree or simply don't want the issue discussed, and youre doing your best to make sure it doesn't get exposure.
Although you are entitled to belileve whatever you like, and vote accordingly, I take exception to the claim that the post i n question was "incoherent nonsense". If it was something that Rok felt was compelling enough to repost (which, incidentally, was entirely unsolicited) , and many other presumably intelligent people agreed with and found it compelling (including @andrachy, who proofed it) and a hundred something people who voted for it. Even if im wrong (ftr im not), there seems to b e enough of a compelling argument to make a lot of people think.
It's absolutely both. The hidden gems posts reference several posts not just one. And even then people still debate whether those are worthwhile . A post referencing only a single post which was not missed but as you point out already got 100+ votes is recycling.
Yes my view on the merits matters too. If I thought something really important and profound was being missed and needed more exposure then I would support giving it that, but I don't.
EDIT: typos
well youve got a point there.
I should point out (then im finished with the matter) at the time when rok reposted, i think i had like 30 or 40 upvotes, nearly all of them by my followers who are (for the most part) no one important.