So the fact that SP is actually the current conversion rate of vests using an ever increasing factor could be interpreted as vests dont compound, ie. are static.

The internal accounting of VESTS is irrelevant, because it is STEEM that we base the external exchange and market capitalization on. I explained this in my comment.

The point about VESTS is also irrelevant because the value of VESTS are effectively taken from STEEM holders and given to STEEM POWER holders. That is the compounded interest payment.

However, the issue here is that it is discussing SP and not the internal vests and the SP caculated from an ever increasing conversion rate sure looks like compounding, acts like compounding, because it is compounding.

It is absolutely compounding. The value VESTS represent are taken from one party and given to another. An interest payment is taken from someone and given to another.

WTF ??? Is wrong with people who upvoted this blog!

So, the OP should really correct the misinformation at the risk of getting downvoted should it not be corrected

I downvoted it because not only did he spread lies about me, he also downvoted my blog post.

I'm sorry dude, but you either do not have any idea what VESTs are and what Steem Power is... or you are blatantly lying to people trying to mislead them...

I'm am trying to be as nice as I can here, but what you're doing is just wrong.

You are welcome to provide cogent rebuttal. I haven't seen one from you yet.

Sort:

Trending

[-]

bacchist (69) 8 years ago

$3.20

4 votes

sigmajin (65) 8 years ago (edited)

Im kind of confused here about the "taken from one party and given to another" thing. Thats not what makes interest compound. Bacchist could have stated it better, but tbh im not sure we're working on the same definition of compounding either

$0.00

1 vote

ghostyeti (51) 8 years ago

I know when I read "You are welcome to provide cogent rebuttal. I haven't seen one from you yet." I know I need a TLDR