You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: @thesloth @thedumpster @thedelegator @steemservices @danknugs @nextgencrypto @berniesanders You can't flag me if I don't post anymore
As I said the whole time you guys were posting about self-voting, it is a legitimate way to grow your account and also a reason to hold on to SP.
I am for self-voting.
The project is still ongoing
Permitted in a system does not make it moral. Clearly also the dev team do not want to see this removed, obviously it would allow them to defend themselves against deserved attacks on their ongoing fleecing of the cryptocurrency community.
How is it immoral of me to use my own stake to upvote my own posts? I am very interested in this answer.
In here, in this den of iniquity, it is the least. I am even using it to counteract attempts to suppress the visibility of this account, while I continue to provoke the nextgencrypto gang into revealing who is who.
But you should realise that the reason why they will never change it is not 'because people can just self upvote using bots'. It's so they can protect their high stake high rep accounts, and continue to abuse the community with their power downs, walking away with the money that those who have been foolish enough to speculate on steem have bought.
I don't expect those who profit from this vicious system to even consider changing the very rules that ensure their control over it continues. But people deserve to know what is going on.
Hmm, you seemed to state that it is immoral to self-upvote and I consider myself to be a moral person, so I was interested in how it is immoral to self-vote
Well, you have a point about perhaps morality not being the issue here. It's how it looks, for a start, because using your reputation and money to promote your stuff upwards looks like you are abusing a social network system where your visibility is supposed to come from those who upvote it, because they like it, not because you were lucky enough to become a favourite of one of the people in the community who are using fraudulent methods to fund their development and pay for nice shiny things, at the expense of others.
And that's where the morality comes back into the picture.
Isn't it interesting that despite your relative popularity, I have got a higher reputation than you? But this means nothing in this 'money is everything' system, except that it's harder to shut me up.
Although I have bantered with you and I disagree with you on some points, I have never tried to "shut you up". In fact, I have poked you, argued with you and read your responses.
I have had many, many posts that did not earn well. I have said unpopular things to some people and I even upvoted your comment knowing it might make Bernie unhappy. Your higher rep proves that you likely have earned more than I have on the site. The difference is I was in a position that allowed me to power up what I did earn. Now my account has a decent vote.
Life's not fair, I wish you could have powered up all that you earned as well. However, I didn't touch my earnings and I reinvested them. I continued to post and I have always given myself a vote on my own posts and on some comments when it makes sense. I consider it a payoff on my investment.
It's doubly unfair in a system that is supposed to be about peer review when actually it's about a little oligarchy-review.
Yes, the correspondence is very strong between how much vote power and stake was applied to my posts, and how much it boosted the reputation. Because I am working on a fork of Steemit, and because the issue about whether bernie can hurt my reputation needed to be cleared up in my mind, I dug around specifically to find the code that sets these rules. So I now know with high confidence that he is gonna be flagging my account for weeks before it even drops below 50.
I was not in a position to not cash out my earnings, because at the time I stopped powering up, I was doing my best to not spend the small extra income I started getting from the dutch welfare agency, and the winter shelter was closing and I was going to be back to sleeping on the street in the cold, and that would have probably led me to squander my resources on coping with that instead of on more substantial beneficial expenditures that would help me continue to raise my position. That's why I bought miners. I still did not do so well with the purchases I made there, but I am still substantially ahead of my costs, so I have time to remedy this. The mischief of bulgarian customs is not making life easy, however. I cannot guarantee that anything order online will actually arrive, or will not incur a severe tax bill.
I wish I had moved back to Sofia instead of trying to get residence permission to stay in Serbia, I could have done so much more with my money here. The language barrier was big, and the administrative costs I was paying for that registration were costs that all came to nothing, in the end.
The campaign was to get the demand built to have it removed from the blockchain. Not the actual dealing with the dumb way it's designed. By practising it I was also showing I do what I say.
I think that this platform is tilting at becoming the next facebook, complete with centralisation, and not about empowering people. It used to be about empowering people, but steadily the design empowered the elitists and that's why I'm done with it.
Steem got me off the street, but I owe it nothing but to make sure there is a platform that is focused on this purpose, because I believe that empowering people to do the right thing and to profit at the same time is desperately needed in today's world.