Yes, Randowhale 💰 is still valuable 💵 after Hardfork 19 (if you know how to use it)
Hat tip to @alexpmorris for the howto from last week.
Does @Randowhale work after hardfork 19?
After the recent Hardfork on June 20, 2017, I got a massive bump in my pending payouts. It was a 6 fold increase in value. Please see my post about how I got a 6 fold increase literally overnight.
This got me thinking, what about the old whale voting idea? Now that my posts were worth $40 to $60 SBD instead of $7 SBD, they now met the criteria for a whale vote massively increasing the value! (Thanks go to @alexpmorris, his post was very insightful!)
So I took a snapshot of my "pending payouts." To those who have never seen this tool, it's found here on Steemviz.com.
Here is a summary of the modest bump I got
This was after paying @randowhale $2 SBD per post on three posts. I think everyone can see that I got more than my $6 SBD back, even with the notorious low SP percent that often happens.
Before
(Screenshots from Steemviz. Credit goes to @ausbitbank for the server and hard work!)
After 3 @Randowhale votes costing $6 SBD
(Screenshots from Steemviz. Credit goes to @ausbitbank for the server and hard work!)
Followup post: See the @Randowhale Smackdown by Whaleshares
Whaleshares are working great after the Hardfork (proof)
Move over @Randowhale, you are about to get swallowed up!
Photographers
Would you like to sign up for my stock photography program? You will get $3 SBD for doing so. Thanks!
Photographers: Get $3 SBD if you sign up for Steem StockPhotos
I disagree. It may be temporarily beneficial for the person getting a small bump in their potential payout, but the whole idea of selling upvotes may very well be the undoing of the whole Steemit system. The point of curation is to ensure that the best content gets rewarded. If any content can be upvoted for the right price, then the purpose of curation is thwarted. In the end, this will not be good for the Steemit community.
In the free market, the ones with the valuable assets are generally able to use them for profit.
In real estate, there are land owners who lease their land to businesses who want the best location.
In the case of the owner of @randowhale, he sees a way to profit from the value of his holdings. I think on Steem, there is blatantly a sour taste when it comes up like this. Should he be able to profit from his valuable assets?
Your argument is valid, however. This "whale" should be leveraging his power to influence new and valuable citizens.
In effect, the @randowhale is permitting poor quality, seedy businesses to lease his land. That's not good for the Steem community, even if it's profitable for him.
Maybe we should deter @randwhale from doing this, but in the end, you would need the Steem police to prevent this. Didn't you just say that you're against the Steem police stepping in?
Seems like you were against the police before you were for it. Without someone "forcing" the whales to submit to community decency rules (like auto downvoting them with a bot or changing the rules), there won't be a way to stop @randowhale if he is not inclined to stop.
I see this as an experiment. I don't know if getting $1000 SBD a day is that big of a deal to @randowhale. Or if anyone is super concerned enough to go battle it out with him. Because, at the end of the day, didn't he earn this money? Is the community truly being harmed by this? Aren't there examples of good content posts getting upvoted and getting better payouts? Isn't he providing a service?
Maybe take it up with the witnesses you vote for. Tell them it's unsustainable. Gang up on @randowhale. Or blog about it. Get a grass-roots coup started to overthrow him, hardfork him out of his Steem Power, or whatever.
Just be sure to wear that badge.... 👮
No, I'm still against police. Discussing it so that people are made aware of the consequences is the way to making consensus. That is hopefully what we're doing.