LOW-LIFE DOWNVOTING MEMBERS
Unfortunately because of low-life members like the following, Steemit's days as a viable forum are quickly coming to an end, because it has essentially turned into nothing more than a cesspool of fraud and corruption, controlled by childish members, porn promoters, and other such low-life human beings (for lack of a better word) with high-reputations, and more money (to buy steem power) than brains.
@themarkymark (AKA @buildawhale) - 77.6
@bullionstackers - 71.9
@buildawhale (AKA @themarkymark) - 74.9
@quarantine (AKA @the-reef / AKA @block-power) - 61.2
@bookguy - 61.0
@mack-bot - 58.8
@the-reef (AKA @block-power / AKA @quarantine) - 54.9
@block-power (AKA @the-reef / AKA @quarantine) - 25.0
@blockcreate - 25.0
@steemcleaner - 1.07
and others.
Please help by filing complaints with the following organizations, as I have done, and which may also assist in getting your money back from this illegal ponzi scheme.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/?utm_source=takeaction#crnt&panel1-1
The Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3)
https://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/cyber
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
https://www.sec.gov/divisions/enforce/claims.htm
Good Luck!
I can understand you feeling any number of emotions in response to your experience here and I would have a ton of empathy for that.
I may even try to support your efforts to change the rules about dust payments (or any number of other issues) which I personally believe are working against building our user base.
But your request and list !
I would not support that kind of thing
"... which I personally believe are working against building our user base."
If we are to be honest with each other and with ourselves, I am quite sure that you realize that under Steemit's current design, its user base of active members will never grow beyond its current level, and if fact, will continue to decline as it has been doing over the past year. New members sign up. Perhaps they invest in some Steem, and perhaps not. But as soon as they discover that it is virtually impossible to make any money with the platform, they will want out as quickly as possible. The only thing creating the "illusion" of greater support, is the fact that it takes 13 weeks to get your investment back. Remove that barrier, and I am confident that you would find that Steemit would essentially become a ghost town overnight.
If Steemit became a ghost town overnight as you say and the price plummeted, I think that it would present a very real opportunity for growth.
I agree, it is very difficult for small accounts to receive rewards. Even most of the votes we are awarded evaporate into the largest stake holders accounts.! The same as it happens in all Communist States.
We can moan and grown about how much the situation sucks for ever, and it will not make things better at all lol
We need to focus on what we DO want, not what we don not want.
So let me ask you the question:
What positive changes do you want to see?
Lets talk about that and find ways of getting closer to making that happen.
"What positive changes do you want to see?
Lets talk about that and find ways of getting closer to making that happen."
Fair enough! Here are 6 for starters...
Change the member "reputation" system so that no member can downvote other members, or hide their posts. This could be accomplished in one of two ways: i) Allow only upvotes for posts, comments or replies; or ii) If we allow both upvotes and downvotes, eliminate the reputation system completely.
Set a specific amount for each upvote, regardless of how much steem power the voting member, or the author has.
Require all members to have so much steem power for each upvote they wish to cast in a given day. i.e. No steem power = no votes.
If we allow downvotes, restrict all members to perhaps just 1 or 2 downvotes per day. This would prevent most retaliation by those members who get their kicks out of downvoting dozens if not hundreds of posts from a single author they decide they do not like for some reason.
Change the curator reward pool so that it is equally divided among "all" upvotes for posts, comments and replies. We could even set a time limit for votes to be counted, perhaps the first 12 hours of a post?
Change the current 13 week power down time frame to something much less, perhaps 4 weeks as a current proposal suggests.
..
If you could contribute something positive toward moving the platform toward a democratic process for choosing our top twenty witnesses, that would be enough.
What would you need to change about the management of your account to achieve that I wonder
"If you could contribute something positive toward moving the platform toward a democratic process for choosing our top twenty witnesses, that would be enough."
Personally I would completely do away with the Witnesss system. Some of the worst abusers on Steemit are actually Witnesses. i.e. @themarkymark, @blocktrades (AKA @unclemantis), @gtg, @cervantes, etc. These people downvote other members for no reason other than their own personal hate.
Witnesses should NOT have the ability to downvote other members. Doing so should immediately remove them as a Witness, and perhaps even have all their Steem Power taken away. Also, allow members to vote "against" Witnesses, without retaliation, NOT just for them.
Please read the whitepaper before speaking again.
@themarkymark and @unclemantis, can you please let me know what @starworld did to deserve the downvotes and what they might be able to do to repair their rep?
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Fixed!
I had no idea I downvoted! Please post link and I will rectify this!
Fixed!
Thanks!
S
Thank you!
you are welcome. Please check your wallet transfers for a personal note. I am indeed sorry, it was a mistake. A slip of the mouse. I take downvoting very seriously too!
What specific crime are you reporting?
That Steemit is essentially run as a ponzi scheme, since it is virtually impossible for the average member to make any money despite claims made that it pays curators for their upvotes. What Steemit does not clearly explain, is the fact that unless members invest in a significant amount of Steem in order to gain a lot of Steem Power, and on top of that, have a reasonably high reputation, they will receive virtually nothing from all their upvoting efforts. This is exactly what happened to me. I invested approximately 800 steem, and with over 1000+ upvotes, it netted me a grand total of less than 25 cents. Nowhere in any of Steemit's documentation does it state that the average member will receive nothing, despite their ongoing investments and efforts. Furthermore, when a member wants out, he has no facility to get his investment back, other than wait a ridiculous 13 weeks (1/4 of a year) for power down to take place. And those facts are where the crime is, and that is what will be investigated.
..
While I agree with most of your assessment, I'm not sure I would personally call steemit a "ponzi-scheme" (nobody promised you'd double or triple your money in a short span of time).
Steemit does seem unfair and misleading, but it's apparently no more unfair or misleading than the true scam we're all born into (fiat currency).
Thanks for your reply!
"I'm not sure I would personally call steemit a "ponzi-scheme""
A "ponzi scheme" is any scheme in which you invest money, and by its design, essentially provides no chance of ever making a return on that money, despite claims to the contrary. Steemit claims you can make money by curating posts, whereas in reality, the vast majority of Steemit members can not and will not do so.
"(nobody promised you'd double or triple your money in a short span of time)."
While it's true that nobody promised that you can double or triple your money, Steemit does claim that you can make money by curating other authors' posts. In reality however, that is simply not the case for most members. Steemit does not state anywhere that the chances of making any money at all, is fully dependent upon both making a significant investment, and on having a relatively high reputation rate. Those 2 facts will immediately eliminate the vast majority of Steemit members. Only a very small number will invest the amount necessary (if any), and gaining a high reputation is next to impossible when you have so many unethical members who are constantly downvoting members with lower reputations than themselves, for no reason at all in the vast majority of cases.
Actually, the definition of a Ponzi Scheme is a fraudulent venture that lures investors and pays profits to earlier investors with funds from more recent investors. If they were asking us to pay some sort of membership fee from which the senior members were getting their rewards - this would be a Ponzi scheme. But when steemers choose to purchase more steam power that doesn't directly benefit those who joined before them or those that referred them. It actually benefits the buyers whose vote now weighs much more than that of a user with mere 15SP.
The best comparison is the online game. Those that are serious about succeeding (or winning?) do spend some of their money buying weapons and armor or whatever other tools they need - even though these tools are virtual and are worth nothing in the real world. Same thing here - people may wish to purchase some virtual power with real money and they may not get any material benefits from it, but this doesn't make Steemit a Ponzi scheme.
Well stated.
"But when steemers choose to purchase more steam power that doesn't directly benefit those who joined before them or those that referred them."
Sure it does! The whales benefit (earn) from investments and curating by the minnows for which they (the minnows) get paid nothing. Without so many minnows, there would be no whales.
"Same thing here - people may wish to purchase some virtual power with real money and they may not get any material benefits from it, but this doesn't make Steemit a Ponzi scheme."
I do not agree! People invest in a game solely for the Entertainment value that it provides. There are no other claims. People invest in Steemit, on the other hand, as a result of Steemit's claims to reward curators, and in the belief that they will actually make money, whereas in reality, they do not, or at least the vast majority do not. And that is what makes Steemit a ponzi scheme.
If rewards were shared equally amount all curators, that would be a much different issue. Likewise, if those members with higher reputations did not have any more downvoting power than lower reputation members, that too would be a much different issue. Downvoting other members simply because you do not agree with what they have to say, has absolutely nothing to do with maintaining a quality forum. In fact, quite the opposite is true. The quality of the Steemit forum is extremely low for that exact reason, because serious social media people will have absolutely nothing to do with a platform such as Steemit.
If Steemit was designed properly, it would have perhaps 100+ million members by now, but as it is, it has only managed to attract a mere 1 million, with less than 5% of those still active.
I agree.
Steem-power does pay out about 8% APR, + if you setup automatic voting to instantly band-wagon onto the top earners like gooddream and nonameslefttouse and steemcleaners, then you can even boost that up a bit.
It's not bad for a hobby, but almost nobody is "making a living" at this. I mean, last time I checked, gooddream was making about $500 a month in payouts (which is hardly lambo cash).
$500 is not a lot of money to make, but it would certainly not be bad for a small hobby. But let's be honest! What percentage of Steemit members make anywhere remotely close to that amount, and what percentage of Steemit members make nothing or close to it?
The overwhelming majority make less-than-break-even for the electricity they pay to run their computer(s).
I'm just pointing out that even those at the TOP aren't exactly "rollin' in it".
"The overwhelming majority make less-than-break-even for the electricity they pay to run their computer(s)."
Agreed! So what's the point? Is this whole Steemit thing really worth it, or are we all just wasting our time putting that $500 per month (or whatever) in the hands of those who really have no respect for the rest of us. Only a fool would do that. I think it's time to shut down Steemit for what it really is...a ponzi scheme.
"I'm just pointing out that even those at the TOP aren't exactly "rollin' in it"."
Point taken! But let's not forget that there are countries in the world where $500 a month would be considered a lot of money.
But regardless of how money is earned or allocated, one of the other main problems with Steemit is the fact that there is almost no original content posted. The vast majority of it is simply copied and pasted from somewhere else on the Internet.
By that definition we'd have to include purchasing a home (most can't sell for a profit), paying for a college education (most never pay off their student loans), starting a small business (90% fail) and investing in the stock market (90% lose money).
No, that is not a correct analysis. First of all, no offer is made in any of the above scenarios that the purchaser will actually make money from their investment, and in all the above cases, the purchaser actually receives value for their investment.
Investing in Steemit on the other hand is made with the claim (assumption) that those investing will make money from their investment. Yet by the very design of Steemit, it ensures that the vast majority of investors will never make any money, with the bulk of the rewards going to only a very select members at the top. That makes Steemit a classic definition of a ponzi scheme.
Feel free to contact the FTC or the FBI and ask them. If you tell them the whole truth, they will tell you exactly as I have.
The kid paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a college education has certainly been told they will be able to at least double their ROI.
Ok, ok, I get that you're upset, but you should be able to get at least most of your "cash" investment back after the 13 week cool-down.
Maybe you lose 10%? It's no riskier than investing in stock-market-securities.
I know people who lost $30,000.00 (and more) when Washington Mutual Bank was dissolved.
WTF is the FTC doing about that?!
Well to be honest from quite a while back when I got really pissed off, it's been quite a while and I don't remember the name but he developed that parley site, but he wasn't the only one involved at the time there was someone else, I did file a complaint with the FTC and before you can file a complaint they ask you what your complaint involves as they aren't going to waste their time filing reports that have no merit...at the end of telling him what my complaint concerned he thought it justifiable enough to take it. I asked him what happens next and he said they get sent out to all the federal and state agencies where they sit until the pile gets big enough that someone finally takes notice and does something about it. In other words when they make a big enough mess on someone's desk who finally decides to pick them up and do something about it. It's been I think well over a year now and I haven't heard back but that doesn't mean that someday isn't coming. For everyone they piss off that pile gets bigger.
As for your argument that people buy non essential things to bolster their chances your point isn't worth holding. People invest in those non essentials to bolster they chances at succeeding. If they do everything right as depicted they should be able to succeed. Failing that success no matter what they do with all the right tools and time invested then that becomes concerning as to why. Nobody should be left holding a dead fish because a system is stacked against them, which we all know this system is. The plain matter of fact is that until Steemit is brought under the governing laws the system will always be stacked because people (higher ups) make their own rules to abide by. I can give you one simple example right here, that being that under federal tax code Steemit has to give the names of all the people they pay more than six hundred dollars a year out to along with those individuals social security numbers or relevant tax ID to the IRS. I know this to be fact because as a landlord if I use a self contractor (which people who participate on this site are doing, self contracting themselves out for a return on profit) and I pay that person more than six hundred dollars I am obligated to report that to the IRS. We all know Steemit doesn't do that. But that's just one example of running rough. The last hard folk they did runs much similar to the complaint I filed which if someday if it ever gets looked it will only bolster the case that the system is designed in favor of the upper tier. Think logically about what they are doing, someone invest time in a system that says you with this much invested you are worth this amount in a vote, then they come down and say now you are totally worthless after one has done invested an incredible amount of time to get to not only where they were promised they'd be at to start but take away any gains you made by slashing your worth and handing it to the upper tier. Now take that same scenario and apply it also to people who invested their money. It just don't add up. Part of the problem is also the fact that a lot of the people invested here are based in foreign countries who may not have the same laws so they feel empowered to just slap anybody around who complains as they are basically untouchable. So it's quite a mess but over all that though is the fact it is a US based company, someone owns it and it's their job to figure out the mess. Will they ever be forced to?...I guess that will all depend upon whoever that person is sitting behind a desk gets tired of seeing Steemit complaints flying across his desk. I mean I really, really like to invest in Steemit, wholeheartedly, but not when the game is stacked against me.
"The kid paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a college education has certainly been told they will be able to at least double their ROI."
Perhaps, but at least the kid got the education for his money. That has to be worth at least something, if not doubling their ROI.
"WTF is the FTC doing about that?!"
The main difference is that Steemit "is designed" to scam the vast majority of members by offering them something that Steemit does not or can not deliver on. That is different that a bank failing. The bank was not setup or designed to specifically scam its customers. Also, most banks have (or should have) deposit insurance which will compensate customers to certain limits, in the event of a bank failure. No one should ever put their money in any bank that does not have such insurance.
Don't even get me started on the lottery or casinos...
hi