And he has that right because he invested a shitload of money. I assume steemit is still based on a capitalistic society.
So tell me what he does wrong. Being annoying or useless doesn't count as something that needs to be censored.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
He has not invested any money into Steem (as far as I know). IF he had invested any when he joined Steemit, it was less than $5000.
Almost all the money he has in his account now is from and because of the @ranchorelaxo upvotes, nothing else.
What does he do wrong? He focuses 95% on himself. While misleading and potentially misleading thousands.
He censors anyone that shows these numbers and disagrees with him.
Recently I posted two Posts that speak facts and opinion about how his actions are damaging to the Steem / Steemit platform. And he 100% downvoted/flagged both. My posts were not mean or vulgar, but he saw it good to CENSOR me.
He is not leading by example in:
Because if that is allowed, then everyone will give up on trying to create good content and will just be self voting worthless posts, ruinning Steemit in the longrun.
-Most people don't create content for the money.
-It's allowed to upvote yourself 10 times a day, change the rules. (maybe an idea steemit)
-It really sounds like an error in the structure of steemit. In the end this is business and he isn't breaking the rules.
He is maybe an asshole but it's all legal. (It's also legal to downvote him to death)
Everything you say is true, but not many are willing to pump 100K in STEEM just to trash this guy.
So that makes him a legal asshole or law abiding asshole? :P