WHY THE BEEF?? Just do what HAEJlN does!

2년 전

From my last post I got a good question. I can see how someone may think this. Blockchain is new to most people. Steem is even newer. Many witnesses probably don't even understand every aspect of Steem. So let's look at this statement:

@abel04 (49) · 44 minutes ago "I really don't understand the reason for this fight. The money haejln makes is not an obstacle to what others make. So why the beef? If you want to make what he makes, then do what he does."


Yeah bruh..... Why the BEEF?

WhyBEEF.jpg

Here is my response with very few modifications and a few additions:

I only have a surface understanding of Steem. Can any of the experts please clarify and correct any mistakes I make, I would appreciate it!


Here is how I explained it.

First, Steem production is a limited number. They are not magically created each time a whale drops a massive upvote. There is a rule that says how much is produced everyday. It is: DAILY STEEM ADDED TO THE REWARD POOL: 49,160

Haijln's 10 daily posts take from the Reward Pool over 1,500 Steem. This is 3% of the reward pool. If no one was flagging Haejln, the number would be higher. Maybe 4%. Maybe 5%.

There are now more than 100,000 users on Steemit. !!!! One person (Haejln) is EVERDAY getting 3-4% of the reward pool!!!

If all big whales do the same, only 33 whales can take so much Rewards, AND ALL THE MINNOWS (and dolphins) WOULD GET NOTHING!!!

Well, the rewards would keep going out for a short while. There is a SURPLUS at the moment. This SURPLUS (the reward pool) is NECESSARY FOR THE FUTURE of Steemit. Once ALL the surplus is gone, then the rewards will be limited to 49,000 per day. And rewards WILL GO DOWN for everyone. Minnows will get 1 Steem for a post when the Post says $10. Whales will get only 10 Steem for a Post when the Post says $100.

The Rewards WILL RUN OUT if every big Whale behaves the same as HAEJlN!!!

If every whale does this, it IS an obstacle for YOU and ME.

Then no one will join Steemit. The price of STEEM will drop to $0.00 and everyone will be sad.

I don't want everyone to be sad.


What about the statement of "just do what he does"....

He does Technical Analysis (TA) on Cryptocurrencies....

Ex Given: @marketingmonk also does technical analysis. He also posts news and information. He also checks out new ICOs. He does research. He posts on D-Tube. He Posts on YouTube. He also draws in hundreds to thousands of new Users onto Steemit. And depending on your opinion, his information (greater than simple TA) may be more valuable than Haejln's. He has been on Steemit longer. And SOME of his posts get $200 each like Haejln's. But he doesn't have a whale that has put his autovoter at 100% on him. And he doesn't post 10 posts a day to GAIN EVERYTHING POSSIBLE!

There is no way that Ranch0Relax0 (the whale that created Haejln) looks at each of Haejln's posts and says "WOW, this post is worth $500 US Dollars!!!" NO, either Ranc0Relax0 IS Haejln, or Haejln is best friends with RR, or Haejln PAID RR for the service.

Votes on Haejlns posts, by accounts... Other Than... Haejln and Ranch0Relax0, make up about 5% of the upvotes....usually less.

Votes on @marketingmonk's posts are 90% by unique users. At most, 20% by one or two whales. 5% for Haejln vs 90% for @marketingmonk

SO "No".... just because you post GREAT CONTENT does not mean you WILL get 10 votes a day, EVERYDAY...... for your content.

Haejln is not THAT SPECIAL. He IS NOT 10 to 100 Times more wonderful than EVERY OTHER STEEMIAN ACCOUNT. HE IS NOT!!! NO, he is either very LUCKY... or he has BOUGHT the services of RR, or HE IS RR.


Sorry for all the BOLD and BIG and EMPHATIC text.....

I was trying to make my point clear... but I think i have just made it loud. I need to do a dSound recording of this post... that would be humorous.

Thx

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
STEEMKR.COM IS SPONSORED BY
ADVERTISEMENT
Sort Order:  trending

After talking to the person that claims to run his website a few weeks ago, rancho and haejin are two different people. However; I still came to the conclusion that haejin and rancho are the same person controlling the same account.

littleboy called rancho "craig" though through a wallet transfer. I am not sure what this means and I am a little intimidated to mention it, but I also assume it's been discussed already.

Regardless, you are 100% right. most, if not all, of the rewards being allocated to haejin are coming from his and ranchos votes alone.

I guess the people that think this is okay will not get it until the rewards pool dries up completely so they can see that no matter how many upvotes they generate, they get zilch, because the big whales are sucking up all the rewards.

Infact, I'd actually like to see this happen, just so that those naysayers can see what it would be like, but I'm afraid bad things would happen if it did, so I hope that it doesn't.

It would be better if the naysayers would just open their eyes and understand this, so we don't go down that dark path and destroy the platform.

·

"waiting" is not the best option. Action is required badly

·
·

It does feel like I am waiting, but I don't want to. It just feels like I'd be stepping into a rocket launcher fight with a knife unless I am guaranteed some kind of safety, which almost defeats the purpose. It's a tough choice for a minnow but I do want to take action. Actions speak louder than words, this is the conundrum.

  ·  2년 전

Exactly! Taking so much from the reward pool on a day after day basis does harm everyone and the Steemit platform.

It must stop!

·
·
·

LOL

·
·
·

You'd love @donkeypoke, they're putting out some great art for the Quest :)

@salahuddin2004 also does TAs and for free. He does not care if he only gets less than $1 for every post.

·

another of the multiple accounts...

·
·

yes its pathetic..

·
·

What do you mean?

I agree, something must be done. This will be interesting to watch. @ironshield

·

TOo many people with greedy incentives are holding too much Steem.

You know what, you brought up a good point. I didn't know enough about how steem tokens are generated. I thought upvoting created new coins, but to my surprise, it just allocates created coins. As a result, there is a limit to how much people can have. If this guy is raping the reward pool, that means less for everyone else.

It is hard to trust whales to do all the balancing because many of them might not even care.

I'm actually curious to see how all of this will turn out.

Whales receive 99% of rewards, including @haejin. Were @haejin completely cut off, that wouldn't change, and minnows, all tens of thousands of us, would still share 1% of rewards, while the whales would see a 5% increase in their ROI.

That's the real issue here.

If you wanna see a better distribution of Steem, then DO follow @haejin's lead, and challenge the 'old money' hegemony that could easily improve distribution of Steem by either following @fulltimegeek's delegation model (which was quite successful, and which I continue to endorse enthusiastically), or just by throwing votes to minnows.

This they rarely do. The vast majority of whale votes are cast for whales, and when they do throw a bone to minnows, it's at negligible power. They concentrate rewards in their accounts, and now they have you and an enraged rabble rioting against a challenger to their hegemonic financial power with pitchforks and torches.

@haejin's rewards could be maximally 5% of the pool. Since minnows get 1% of rewards, @haejin losing all his rewards would deliver to you .2% better rewards.

That's quite literally the price you are being offered to tackle the enemy of your enemies, the profiteers that suck the rewards pool dry, leaving the rest of us but their crumbs. @haejin is only following the model those whales established, with their votebots, selfvotes, and delegation rentals. Even if @ranchorelaxo is no more than selling his votes, why is it wrong that he sells them only to one person, rather than many?

Either way, why do you rail against the only example of organic growth and competition to the oligarchy that has been, and continues to, take virtually the entire rewards pool, and leave the minnows but a pittance?

Propaganda has truly shown it's power in this drafting of minnows to do whales' dirty work.

·

I think friction has a lot to do with the power imbalance, as well as the objectives of people who buy into steem with fresh money. New big money wants to make money on that money, I can't think of many cases where people will say to themselves, "Gee, I made a lot of money in crypto, I better toss it into a firepit by investing in this social media website where at best I get hated on for wanting ROI, or I can try to vote on users who didn't invest as much money as me and hope some of them have some loyalty to both the platform and myself and we eventually help each other out," because that sounds straight retarded when I even type it out as a hypothetical.

The friction of course being the fact that many here are in precarious financial situations so they're likely to cash their SBD out so voting on a bunch of minnows isn't a guarantee that you'll grow your power like voting for yourself or other already wealthy individuals who don't have to do so much cashing out and powering down are.

·
·

sigh You make so much damn sense! Knock it off!

Yeah, that does totally sound retarded, TBQH. But, it's not the actual solution I advocate. Rather than randomly upvoting newbs (kinda how bots actually work), curation is about selectivity. When you are careful about whom you promote, and they are suitably encouraged, loyalty results.

Have a look at @surpassinggoogle's work on Steemit. His followers are practically rabid, and myriad to boot. While I'm sure many have fallen by the wayside, he demonstrably creates loyal, even loving, followers by being selfless and encouraging.

He isn't selective either. He loves and encourages everybody!

Using moderate delegations of around 5k, whales could create far greater penetration of their VP into the hordes of newbs--yet under curative direction, selectively upvoting those showing hints of good qualities that would improve the community. @fulltimegeek showed this works with his delegations in exactly that way.

He managed a couple dozen 'stewards' of his SP. If even half a dozen whales did that, there'd be hundreds, even thousands of delegates meticulously curating new accounts, and building loyalty.

The delegators would even still own their SP, and profit from price appreciation that derived therefrom. They can buy and invest in copious goodwill, without actually paying any money for it, just by lending it without interest.

This is the solution I recommend. While it seems to be less immediately emunerative than selfvotes, or leasing SP to bidbots, those don't increase the price of Steem by increasing a loyal userbase, which moderate delegations does do.

When the price of Steem recently shot up to $4 from $1, everyone, including the whales, saw a 400% increase in the value of their holdings. That should be a huge clue that capital gains has far more profitable potential than rewards pool mining, at which you can double your SP in a year of diligent selfvoting--but without any chance of increasing the value of Steem.

Given Steem's technical superiority to BTC and ETH as a means of exchange (far more scalable, much faster xfers, and zero fees, for example) it isn't unlikely to me that Steem could attain the modest value of .1 BTC.

Do the math.

The magic of delegation is that the investment doesn't risk the capital, merely the short term profits on that capital, which instead becomes a sort of dividend for the delegates; a further investment, generating goodwill.

I hope that sounds less retarded. It sounds compelling to me.

Thanks for your substantive and thoughtful comments.

·
·
·

I don't disagree with anything you have to say, but I will say that of course this route would be better for the platform and inspire more to stay and get really involved in the community, but from the standpoint of those who don't believe in the platform or just want to maximize current returns, they're probably more than fine with having the rest shoulder the burden of doing what you suggested.

Another important thing to keep in mind is that Surpgoog was a rarity amongst those who were delegated to, even fulltimegeek has cut a few stewards because of self-voting or other bad practices he didn't like, and that's when the stakes and payouts were lower. Self-interest and the need to feel like you have a large monetary buffer against hardships is a very common strain amongst most.

·
·
·
·

The only point I will make in response to this eminently reasonable assessment is that there is a substantial difference between the delegation to @surpassinggoogle and the others @ned delegated to, and those made by @fulltimegeek. Terry got 500k and @fulltimegeek's stewards got 5k.

This is exactly why I advocate for moderate delegations of about 5k, rather than orders of magnitude more. I think the difference also speaks to the core issues on the platform, with whales having vastly different interests than minnows.

While some few of @fulltimegeek's delegates did prove less than ideal, most showed they were able to handle the responsibility well, and problems were easily solved by withdrawing the delegations.

Thanks for the in depth discussion, and opportunity to explore the potential to grow the Steemit community. I appreciate it very much!

Edit: rereading your comment I noted this:

"...they're probably more than fine with having the rest shoulder the burden..."

I suspect this is a large part of why this hasn't been undertaken, as it's a classic commons problem. Like corporations externalizing the costs of environmental cleanups, there are probably folks that seek to benefit from such an undertaking without contributing, and this causes those that would like to, not to do it.

@fulltimegeek was altruistic enough to do it anyway, and that's admirable.

·

"the only example of organic growth" seriously? You really make me laugh!

the ONLLY????? example of organic growth??

How do you figure that?

He is not that only 'semi famous person' that has come over to steemit. and his 25K of followers is only because he is hitting trending everyday with paid Rewards, and sadly, most new minnows think they will earn curation rewards if they upvote a post that hits $100+. THey don't. For every 0.005 that they contribute, they will at most get exactly 0.0006 SP in curation rewards. That isn't 0.001. So that equals a big fat 0. But they think curation rewards are coming. So yeah, he has 10K gullible newbie followers all giving their 0.005 hoping to get back 0.10 or 0.50 that will never come. Because their curation rewards are negligable and Haejin doesn't upvote his followers.

HOW IS THAT ORGANIC?

·
·

As far as I know @haejin came here as a newb, and grew his account from zero, without investing piles of cash. The growth of his account is thus organic, derived from his activities on Steemit alone.

While my account and many, many others, are also organic, @haejin is the only account to achieve substantial rewards that are on a par with whales. What I said was:

"...only example of organic growth and competition to the oligarchy..."

So, not just organic, but competitive with the whales for rewards. To be completely and demonstrably correct, I should add 'to my knowledge', because others may have achieved this feat that I am unaware of.

If you wish to actually prove a point, misconstruing my statements won't achieve that. Rather the reverse. If you continue to put words in my mouth, or take my remarks out of context, it will become apparent that you have no means of countering the content of my remarks except ad hominem attacks, which proves you wrong.

Don't prove yourself wrong.

"...his 25K of followers is only because he is hitting trending everyday ..."

Well, from what I've read of their remarks regarding the matter, they follow @haejin because they believe he is giving them good advice about crypto trading. I've never heard one of them say they followed him because he was trending, or they thought they'd get curation rewards.

When did they tell you that?

Are you perhaps putting words in their mouths as well? It seems that you may be experiencing some cognitive dissonance regarding your stance on @haejin. Cognitive dissonance is an indication that one is refusing to acknowledge facts in order to maintain a belief that is inconsistent with those facts.

It might be beneficial to you to take break and examine what you actually believe, and why my statements are causing you cognitive dissonance.

Also, you're working yourself up into an all caps lather. Better you just mute me than have a stroke, bro.

·
·
·

Haejin has 74K followers on Twitter and 45K followers on Youtube. He joined both in 2012.

I know he was posting videos onto youtube prior to 5 months ago, but they have all been deleted, so I cannot see how many views he was getting there compared to now back in June of 2017 when he joined Steem.

It is my understanding, most of his early Steemit followers (10K plus) came over from Youtube. (and or Twitter)

To me, that is not a self-made steemian as much as a self made TWiTer or YouTuber that came over to Steemit. In that case, no different than JerryBainfield or DollarVigilante.

Also, all of his early posts were earning $5-$25, with an occasional $50 until RanchoRelax started upvoting him 100% x 10 per day.

There are 100's (if not thousands) of Steemians that consistently get $5-$25 per post, day in and day out. Where are their whales? If they had them, they would all be Steemit success stories too.

Haejin is not "nothing" but he is not 1000 times better than these other 100 or 500 or 1000 Steemians.

A 100% upvote arrangement that is utilized daily at the full 10 X upvote potential is "lucky" at best. Unusual to be sure. Suspect.. maybe. But in no way makes him someone that is "bucking the system" He is part of the system. He would have "bucked the system" if he was getting post rewards of $300 X 10 DAILY all from votes of Steemians with 25,000 SP and less. That would be something special.

Why do you think that so few whales are participating in the flag initiative?? If they were truly threatened or wanted that extra 5% then half or all would have joined in. It is because they are not feeling the hurt. Many of them also scam the system and so they aren't going to be the ones calling the kettle black. etc.

The 2 to 3 whales that ARE flagging.... are the good guys. They are those that DO upvote minnows REGULARLY. One can be a dick. THat is sure. But he is also one that has created more (tiny) dolphins (possibly) than few or any other whales. (i'm not talking about his 25 account bot army. Bernie has given out more big and small upvotes to regular minnow steemians than almost any other whale. He was doing it from the beginning. But don't force me to sing his praises, because I honestly don't like his vulgarity etc. But you want facts, there is one for you. Fact check it if you so desire.

No stroke here.
Thx.

·
·
·
·

"It is my understanding, most of his early Steemit followers (10K plus) came over from Youtube. (and or Twitter)..."

I was not aware of that, and I was wrong about his account growth being purely organic. I appreciate being apprised of the facts that change that particular aspect of the matter.

So, the model @haejin provides is less applicable, as most of us don't have dedicated followings we can drag onto Steemit from other platforms.

Nonetheless, the math regarding the rewards remains just as valid.

I reckon also that by providing this particular fact, you demonstrate that you have no data to back your statement that minnows are getting more than 1% of the rewards. If you did, you'd post that too. Instead of just admitting that, you continue to try to deflect the issue.

I've no further comments to make here.

Enjoy your day.

나는 이것 처럼 보 곤 했
decentmemes-1520112844895
하지만 지금은 내가 편지 H 조 숨어 있어 이후

They are not magically created each time a whale drops a massive upvote.

Unfortunately, many Steemians don't get it. Even if they were magically created, their USD value would drop, which is what inflation is.

Haijln's 10 daily posts take from the Reward Pool over 1,500 Steem.

Just by coincidence, a user's voting power is utilized optimally with ten votes a day. Hmm?

There are now more than 100,000 users on Steemit.

750K+

If all big whales do the same, only 33 whales can take so much Rewards, AND ALL THE MINNOWS (and dolphins) WOULD GET NOTHING!!!

Almost nothing. Small accounts can also abuse the reward pool with the same ROI, if they manage to go under the radar and not get flagged.

Then no one will join Steemit. The price of STEEM will drop to $0.00 and everyone will be sad.

Great point again! Almost no one gets that the price of Steem is bound to the quality of this website and the content in it.

Without this website and content in it and with its 9% yearly inflation, Steem is a much worse asset compared to Bitcoin, which has 4+% annual inflation at the moment.

In its current state of this website, I'm bearish on Steem to say the least.

What about the statement of "just do what he does"....

As you say above, if we all do what he does, we'll soon see that beautiful invention that the number 0 is.

Votes on @marketingmonk's posts are 90% by unique users. At most, 20% by one or two whales. 5% for Haejln vs 90% for @marketingmonk

That's some very good stats! We need more of these! What are other accounts regardless of the size of their rewards that have such skewed voting stats?

·

Steem the blockchain could be salvaged or even could move straight past the Blogging with SMT's or other front ends or innovations... but in all likelihood, if Steemit fails, Steem price will drop to $0.10 or less for a while(Which, if that happens, I will probably buy 2K-3K Steem. Just saying.)

I don't know. Maybe Ned has given up on the blogging side and is trying to move SMTs forward for when the Steemit platform falls. But it IS in steemit inc and ned's best interest to see Steem succeed. They own so many millions. Would be a shame for them all to be worth 0.

For your last question.... do you mean that do good? or that do bad?
There are MANY that do bad just like Haejln. I have reported many to steemcleaners over the last 5 months.
That do good?
I still support @healthy-home and @ocd and of course @fulltimegeek (his delegations were starting to do AMAZING good!!). There is a lot of good on the platform. But a large tumor can spread and do so much damage.
Thx

·
·

Steem the blockchain could be salvaged or even could move straight past the Blogging with SMT's or other front ends or innovations...

I'm looking forward for the SMT's and other innovations.

if Steemit fails, Steem price will drop to $0.10 or less for a while(Which, if that happens, I will probably buy 2K-3K Steem. Just saying.)

In that case, I won't buy 2K-3K Steem. This strategy reminds of buying penny stocks. Sure, those companies can turn around, but a good deal of them go straight to $0. You never know.

I don't know. Maybe Ned has given up on the blogging side and is trying to move SMTs forward for when the Steemit platform falls. But it IS in steemit inc and ned's best interest to see Steem succeed. They own so many millions. Would be a shame for them all to be worth 0.

I don't know about his background. Maybe, they aren't bothered about millions. Maybe they are amazed by their success and got spoiled by it. Maybe, they didn't expect Steem to reach a billion dollar valuation. Maybe, they think this was a mistake and it will correct itself. Maybe, they want to keep it small and don't want to grow it themselves. Maybe, they want to keep it as a small personal project and don't want to hire a bunch of people. There are so many possible explanations about what's going on.

For your last question.... do you mean that do good? or that do bad?
There are MANY that do bad just like Haejln. I have reported many to steemcleaners over the last 5 months.

I meant that do bad. Thank you for your work!

That do good?
I still support @healthy-home and @ocd and of course @fulltimegeek (his delegations were starting to do AMAZING good!!). There is a lot of good on the platform. But a large tumor can spread and do so much damage.

Thank you for these handles. I will check them out.

·
·
·

haha, your "maybe"s are better than mine!

Thanks for joining the conversation!
Good luck!

·
·
·

haha, your "maybe"s are better than mine!

Yeah.... I do think the Steem blockchain is amazing, but if Steem goes to $0.10 I will decide at that time to really buy or not.

Thanks for joining the conversation!
Good luck!

·

"750K+"

The retention rate for Steemit accounts is ~10% YOY. While there have been that many accounts opened, 90% of them are either defunct, or will soon be.

"Almost nothing. Small accounts can also abuse the reward pool with the same ROI, if they manage to go under the radar and not get flagged."

Only by recruiting whales to upvote them. The extant situation is exactly what @public.eye is warning will happen. It's already been happening, and @haejin is the only change that's been forced on the hegemonic financial control of rewards, making the whales share 5% of the rewards pool with a minnow.

"Without this website and content in it and with its 9% yearly inflation, Steem is a much worse asset compared to Bitcoin, which has 4+% annual inflation at the moment."

You consider only TA, rather than underlying technological issues. BTC is hamstrung by enormous fees, sluggish transfer and verification rates, compared to Steem, which currently is at .01% of network capacity, while outperforming BTC and ETH (which cryptokitties practically ground to a standstill) combined already in terms of daily transactions. It does this with zero fees, which you can compare to the up to 25% fee for making a transaction in BTC.

Steem is a vastly superior technology than BTC or ETH. Sooner or later, the market will learn this. Then it will be sorta like horse and buggy manufacturers faced with Henry Ford's Model A.

"That's some very good stats!"

Not so much from a financial standpoint, as @haejin has forced the whales to share 5% of the rewards pool with a minnow, through using their tactics against them. @marketingmonk, you, I, every minnow on the platform should follow his example of successfully forcing the democritization of Steem distribution on Steemit.

That would drive millions of eager new users to the platform, and drive the price of Steem to the moon, particularly as the interest in the token revealed it's superior technology.

Oddly enough, that would create a vastly improved ROI for the whales who have derived their stakes by flashmining (no longer allowed, now that the public has Steemit available to it) rather than by investing cash, by creating capital gains similar to what we saw for BTC last year.

It's hard for me to see @haejin as anything other than the greatest catalyst for Steem to grow that has appeared to date, including the potential of SMTs.

·
·

@haejin has shown no care for the community at all. He has only upvoted anyone other than himself and his friend Juno maybe 1% of his voting power ever.

@haejin has withdrawn most of his liquid Steem (until recently maybe..we'll see when it continues). He is not investing in the platform, so he will never disrupt any whale on Steem/Steemit.

He does not care for his followers, only molds them as good little cult children.

And yes, there are bad whales, and questionable whales, and ok whales, and great whales. But they don't keep 95% for themselves. Even the worst Whales end up spreading around more than 5%. And the best whales (@fulltimegeek) spread around as much as 90%.

So for as much as you bring up a few valid points, you are just as biased as I am. Your distrust or jealousy or hatred or whatever it is for the whales is as bad or worse than my trust in them(which aint much either.).

Good luck with your theory that @haejin is the saviour of Steem.

·
·
·

"@haejin has shown no care for the community at all. He has only upvoted anyone other than himself and his friend Juno maybe 1% of his voting power ever."

This is false. Check Steemreports for my account. He countered flags @sneak hammered me with when I spoke against censorship. I was that day one of the hardest flagged accounts on the platform, and @haejin countered the flags precisely, leaving me with the value others had upvoted.

I am not a follower of @haejin, have never commented one of his posts, and don't trade crypto. He just protected community members advocating free speech from censorship.

That is community support.

"@haejin ... is not investing in the platform..."

What kind of lunatic would invest in a platform as demonstrably hostile to him as you are making Steemit? He's being incessantly and heavily hammered with flags. What would a reasonable investment program in Steem be for someone in his position, in your opinion?

"He does not care for his followers, only molds them as good little cult children."

... srsly? I have to say that isn't a statement of fact, and is highly pejorative.

"So for as much as you bring up a few valid points, you are just as biased as I am. Your distrust or jealousy or hatred or whatever it is for the whales..."

When you discuss my feelings, you undertake what is called 'projection'. I haven't discussed my, yours, or @haejin's feelings, other than to point out I am grateful for his countering @sneak and @bloom's flags.

Let's not.

I have no particular interest in money except in regards to how it affects Steemit, which I do have a particular interest in as a new kind of social media platform with potential, I think, to change the world in a significant and substantive way.

"Good luck with your theory that @haejin is the saviour of Steem."

Putting words in my mouth isn't a route towards understanding. It's a well known tactic to discredit an opponent, which you apparently view me as.

I said I see @haejin as a catalyst for change. I've repeatedly described how a minnow carving out from whales that determinedly oppose parting with it, a substantial portion of rewards, is an example I believe most folks on Steemit would like to emulate.

Downvoting @haejin costs you more SP than you could possibly hope to gain from driving him from the platform.

So, why do it?

ti is also funny post,

thank you sir for your post.

So is this situation, or loop hole, or whatever you want to call it, being looked at by the Steemit developers? If it threatens the longevity of Steemit or harms the platform- then shouldn't the programmers fix it?
I admit- I do not understand the math, etc.. but this seems like a loop hole that should be fixed.
Thanks for the heads up.

·

I agree, the Steemit (okay, we should probably say: Steem. It is the programming. It is the blockchain) developers should be watching this and doing something.

So... is it a loophole?? Maybe sorta. Steem is programmed to give SOMETHING from Nothing. It works that way for you and me. We have nothing or gave nothing into the Reward Pool, but we get Steem from the Reward Pool for our activity here.

Now, it is SUPPOSED to be, that good, smart people will only select good Posts and Comments to reward. But People are never perfect. ANd some people let GREED rule their actions. So they give only what will benefit them or their friends. Many Steemit users "Abuse" the system by voting for their friends or themselves EVEN WHEN there are other users doing BETTER work. But most Steemit users that abuse the system do it with some "CONTROL" and try to not make it too obvious. They limit their GREED somewhat because they know the community is watching.

But what do you do when the Steemit USER has SO MUCH Steem Power and doesn't care what the community thinks? You get abuse like Haejln is doing here.

And this is dangerous. Because RIGHT NOW Haejln is making much profit off of Steem/Steemit. But if he continues, or if more whales start to all do the same thing, then it WILL Ruin Steemit, and maybe ruin Steem too!!

To answer your question.... the answer to this problem was written into the code already. It is the FLAG function. Steemit and Steem is not broken or have a loophole.

Steem was written as a COMMUNITY BASED BLOCKCHAIN. The community can and is supposed to regulate the Rewards in a way that is beneficial to EVERYONE. ----->THE STEEMIT COMMUNITY has had the FIX (the solution) the whole time. We will see today, if the community will stand up and use the Flag function to stop the abuse or not!

I am standing. Let us hope that many, many more are also.

·
·

You are completely ignoring that those 'greedy users' are those that get the most rewards: the whales. Not just @haejin, who became a whale using the very tactics the whales are using to maintain their control of the rewards pool.

"...some people let GREED rule their actions. So they give only what will benefit them or their friends."

The whales.

@haejin should be your HERO, who has forced the whales to give up 5% of 'their' rewards pool to a minnow. He should be an example of how to democratize the rewards doled out on this platform, so that the 1% aren't getting 99% of rewards here.

Do the math. The whales get 99% of rewards, leaving ALL the minnows 1% to share amongst us. The median payout is .01 SBD. @haejin's rewards are maximally 5% of the pool. That decreases the ROI of the 35 whales by 5% (our 1% is negligible to them).

Were @haejin to quit posting, that 5% would return to the pool, where the whales would take 99% of it (or do you expect them to dole it out to minnows in a completely new program of upvoting minnows?), leaving 1% of 5% of rewards to be shared amongst the tens of thousands of minnows.

1% times 5% is .2%. How much does that affect your rewards?

None. You won't even notice. The median payout is .01 SBD. How much is .2% of .01?

Zero, +/- a rounding error--that is how much @haejin is affecting you, while forcing the whales to share the rewards pool with a minnow - he came up from nothing.

Thimk.

·
·
·

You know nothing of what I am and am not ignoring.

@haejin is the abuser that is being handled at the moment.

After this situation has been righted, more problems will be addressed.

And Steemit members with 5000 SP or less are getting more than 1%, sorry. Whatever calculation or post you read that said that was wrong, old or biased.

Thanks for contributing solutions and not just whining and being a negative nelly.

·
·
·
·

" Steemit members with 5000 SP or less are getting more than 1%, sorry. Whatever calculation or post you read that said that was wrong, old or biased."

Please share your data.

I'd love to be wrong about that.

My data begins several months ago, and I have been attentive to such posts as I saw regarding the matter, without seeing any indication that the situation had improved. Here's a chart from just prior to HF19:

authorrewardchart.png

I showed you mine. Please show me yours.

·
·
·
·
·

Where does the chart say 99% or 1% or anything? It gives no percentages.

And from 4 months ago... who knows. But Fulltimegeek's stewards of gondor initiative alone it had to have made a difference of more than 1% straight up transfer into minnows accounts. SOG only ended(was suspended) 12 days ago. Payouts for the last of their effect just finished maturing 5 days ago.

Show me recent data. You made the claim. Show me yours.

·
·
·
·
·
·

I asked @fulltimegeek or @abh12345 (don't remember which) if they had any data regarding the impact of the delegation effort, which I totally and completely support to this day.

I don't recall a response with data coming from that query.

I have repeatedly, as I stated, requested a similar chart
of recent data from @arcange, and not received one.

I am not competent to troll the blockchain for the raw data.

I responded to your statement that 'folks with under 5k SP get more than 1% of rewards.'

The chart very obviously shows that the vast majority of Steem, over 99%, is attained by a handful of accounts.

It is dated, but I have not been able to get new data.

You made the claim that I was not correct, and I supported my claim with data.

Either support your claim with data, or fail to support your claim.

That's how it works.

Science!

·
·
·
·
·

To the facts:

  • You started the "projection" (if it can be said) in regards to actions by saying that I am "completely ignoring that those 'greedy users' are those that get the most rewards: the whales."
  • When I pointed out that you do not know what I am ignoring or paying attention to.. You said nothing.
  • Your data that you pasted here, the chart, provides no facts that can be used to back up your 99% - 1% assertion. It isn't even useful for reading because each listed whales MV shares are not accurately readable. THat isn't the worst of it. We would need the number of everyone that is not on that chart, added together, in order to get an accurate figure. You have provided nothing. Why would I do your work when you come to my blog and post these numbers?? IF you are going to say 99% 1% then back it up or go away.

(sorry, opinion here: YOU have wasted my time. You portend that you are a facts person that cares not for money or its value on this platform, and yet mostly only posted pseudo-facts. Even your use of Haejin upvoting you does not DISPROVE my assertion that he has helped/upvoted minnows 1%. 10 -100% upvotes everyday for 100 days vs 1 ??? % upvote to one minnow to negate a flag. Doesn't make his contribution greater than 1%.)

  • I will not mute you. I never mute anyone. Why would I allow one user to plaster on my blog and potentially bother my followers and commenters and leave my self un awares? I wouldn't.
·
·
·
·
·
·

"Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others."--Wikipedia

Conflating my statement of fact that you didn't mention (ignored) that the 'greedy people' were the whales with projection is inaccurate and demonstrates your lack of understanding.

In fact, doing so is projection.

Throughout this conversation you have put words in my mouth, taken my remarks out of context, feigned ignorance, refused to back up your statements with data, and imputed your own actions to me (projection). You've about covered all the bases with regard to deceptive tactics for trolls.

I have provided substantive data that shows flagging @haejin is costing you SP.

You are dodging facts, prevaricating, making shit up, and generally proving you have no idea what you're doing or why you're doing it.

One last example, just because it sounds reasonable (only because you're again pretending you said something else) and might fool somebody:

"...your use of Haejin upvoting you does not DISPROVE my assertion..."

And your assertion was:

"@haejin has shown no care for the community at all."

Countering flags on accounts he has no relationship to at all is clearly beneficial to the community concerned with free speech, showing he does care enough to spend his SP on it--even when he's fighting a horde of flags on his own account.

Neither I, nor anyone, can protect you or your SP from yourself.

Anyone that has followed this conversation has either grasped the facts, or isn't going to. I hope some folks have learned information that will enable them to protect their SP, rather than frittering it away in an orgy of envy and impotent rage.

Trolls find that sort of thing entertaining, and will continue to enjoy spending their SP on it, like gamblers feeding nickels into slot machines.

I could continue to demonstrate what you're saying isn't true, and what you're doing is going to cost you money and further sacrifice your integrity even if it works, but it's not going to help you, since you have amply shown you compulsively have to believe what you're doing is right and profitable, and are going to continue this foolish course of action regardless of facts.

I'll leave you to it.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Right? Yes, I do believe so.

"since you have amply shown you compulsively have to believe what you're doing is right and profitable."

I never ever said than any of my efforts to stop Haejin's abuse was for profit. I have no expectation of profit from it at all. I am doing it for the good of the platform. For the common good.

For myself only in as much as I will not continue to use a doomed platform. If the blogging aspect of Steem is going to be dead in a year or less, then I will withdrawal my time and participation now. Why ride a sinking ship?

Until I believe that it is a failed experiment, I will continue working towards keeping it running well. My belief is that Haejin is one piece of the problem, and that whales were starting to address this problem. At which case, I will happily stand up and do my part. Maybe after Haejin has been cooled off we could take on sweetssj. Or is she another innocent that we should leave alone? Let me know. :-)

Excellent explanation. Thank you.

All good things to point out! Following you. The system is flawed. I think the self upvote at 100% should be removed. One should be able to self vote at least once in a certain timeframe and not at 100%. The more SP you have the less % you should be able to self vote. However, if you have two funded account the votes could be passed back and forth between the two. Who is to police this if we can’t police ourselves?

·

Yes, you are right...

we are to police ourselves. That is the only answer.

And you answered your own question: if the rules were changed to not allow a self upvote, the SCAMMERS would just open and fund a second account. Then they would use two accounts to vote back and forth. THis is actually a problem that has been done many times already. It is probably still being done. People do it to hide their greed.

But if we changed the rules, then it would be done much much worse.

The answer is us. The answer is you and me and the dolphins and whales and 1000 big minnows out there to stand up and say "STOP". And the way to say stop is with the FLAG function.
Thx

·

@qwasert you make excellent point stating that self upvote should be removed. I personally never upvote my posts or comments and I think that self upvoting is most stupid think here on Steemit. It's like to fuck yourself and enjoy in the process. Again! It is stupid, weird, silly meaningless!!! Just greedy pigs upvote themselves to grab as much as possible from the reward pool. We all know them Steemit don't hide anything. I boost my earnings to use @minnowbooster bot lately but I stopped using it, because it's silly too.

So to domesticate this greedy herd I propose three changes in steem voting protocol:

  • Cancel self upvoting.
  • Powering down should be done through delegating steem power. Could be done automatically to followers which upvote your posts most, or user can delegate SP according his will.
  • If reputation/steem power ratio defined by the steem blockchain is exceeded the user is forced to delegate superfluous SP in one week. It this haven't been done superfluous SP is then burned by sending too @null account.

This measures will stimulate users to upvote other users for contributing good stuff and get an upvote by doing the same. Power down process will help distributing SP and sprout fair distribution of reward pool and SP upper limit will have same effect beside preventing abuses from really dominant whales.

·
·

As has already been said.... "self voting" will not go away. IF we cancel "self upvoting" then cheats will just open a second account and upvote themselves back and forth. Cheaters can manipulate and work around almost every rule and system. ANd if money is involved, they will.

Secondly, your idea for Powering down will not work. The Steem that is powered up is the person's own steem. Maybe they bought it, maybe they worked hard for it. If they decide to leave Steem/Steemit and cash out then they are allowed to do so. I don't think anyone would accept this suggestion.

Thanks for joining the conversation!

·
·
·

You are right about self upvoting. Maybe I don't elaborate my thoughts enough. I plan I will write about that in a new post. (will put a link in this comments here).

And by powering down through delegation I don't mean that SP delegated remind on delegated accounts. It just sit there for power down period and then is transferred back to the account from where was delegated.
With this delegates donate something to the community also. On the end this platform make possible earning SP, they chose to withdraw and use it in other ways they want.

I wrote about this subject also in this comment @.

·
·

Canceling the self-upvote doesn't solve anything and is easily circumvented by creating another account(s) and use it to upvote. In fact, many users do that already with bots and multiple accounts. Of course, this approach can be applied by smart users who know how the Steem blockchain works. Minnows would be clueless about it and it wouldn't be helpful to them if they couldn't give themselves a little self-upvote boost.

·
·
·

I get your point, but anyway Steemit is social platform and upvoting others (especially real people) as social activity is desired here. I think that is better to upvote each other and in the process benefit also from some good content.

I wrote about this subject also in this comment @.

It will take me a life time to purchase the steem that this guys takes away in his reward everyday.

·

true

and sad that he doesn't care for being so greedy.

·

so basically you are saying that the people voting for him are not allowed to use their vp in the way they please?

Because I think that you can do with your own vp whatever tf you want. Of course you can think about the future of steem and you can downvote etc...
But as far as I know hajein is not forcing anyone to use his vp for him so I dont get all the hate.

Obviously excessive self-voting is a problem for the development of steem. But this is a problem that is mostly self-regulating. Who has the biggest interest in making steem a success? Obviously the whales, including haejin. So I just relax and let them sort it out. Note that I am not criticising down-voting campaigns at all. This is part of the whales finding a solution for the future of steem. I am only asking to remain friendly and civil.

Also as a minnow I have no interest in taking sides. If steem fails something new will appear. Let the whales fight and that is good for us. In the end making steem a success is allowing for a broad distribution. It supports the value of steem and at the same time makes reward rape impossible.

·

people ARE allowed to use their vp in the way they please. Where did I say they couldn't???

But in the case of Haejln it is against the principle of Steem (and as we see it on the Steemit.com website) to be "milking the system" irrespective of quality.

And it is 100% okay for other people to use their VP to protest those rewards and remove tiny fractions of those rewards through the flag function.... First reason for a flag: "Disagreement on Rewards"

Have I not been friendly or civil in any part of my Post or in my actions?

If you are referring to the ugly comments on Haejln's posts, those are by a whale. I do not agree with the way he communicates. Maybe if Haejln had changed his behaviour early on, then that whale would have never started being so rude. I hate seeing the greed of Haejln and the rudeness of that whale.
Thx for the comment

·

Do you really think that?
Different from some whales that are selfish, but still Control themselves on the reward pool rape, its pretty clear that he wants to take as much as possible and as quickly as possible before everything fall apart (wich Will, the way things are going around here).
Then probably move to the next blockchain project and do the same shit.

And let the whales fight is not really a good solution, since i only see 3 or 4 of 36 to actually care enough to do something one way or another.

·
·

Yes I really think that. You are asking that the small guys spend their steem power since the rich are too greedy to do it themselves. But it is the rich that are stuck and that have a duty to support the community to make it a success. So if only 3 whales care then just let steem go down and something new and maybe better will get a chance to grow.

Well your explanation sounds good to me since I am a minnow.

I agree, something must be done

steemit, primarily by applying the esteem.this is a remarkable achievement

Hey @public-eye, great post! I enjoyed your content. Keep up the good work! It's always nice to see good content here on Steemit! Cheers :)

Yes, it's an issue. If everyone did it , it doesn't work, because only those with concentrated amount of SP can pull it off anyways. So many people have multiple accounts, and upvote themselves with their multiple accounts. Berniesanders is one of them. Why is he seen as a hero for doing similar to this haejln character? He's flagged me for months before, when I wasn't even upvoting myself... taking away the rewards others allocate to me... yet he's a hero...? lol.

·

First, many people do not see him as a hero. I think he is right and doing the right thing in relation to flagging haejln, but his comments there are uncouth and there are other cases were he is certainly in the wrong(with you as example!?).

I don't know how much he upvotes himself.

Here is my thought on upvotes and flagging others... if you are spending 75% of your Voting Power to flag an account like Haejln, then it is fine to use the remaining 25% (even exclusively) to upvote yourself. (and it will show up as 100% upvoting yourself on steemreports, since it isn't analyzing your flagging as a proportion). You are spending your time and giving up your upvote in order to do a community service. Steemcleaners does this, and it is fine.

Obviously, "picking" on people just because you don't like something they have said is not okay. ANd the vulgarity really is unnecessary.

And I disagree with you getting flagged on this comment. There are many issues on the platform. I do think Haejln is one of the worst (and I recently learned sweetssj does something similar through 12 different accounts... Not sure if that has stopped already, but it may be as bad as Haejln).
Thx