You bitch and bitch and bitch about rewards, how the system "isn't working", yet you still allow this bullshit to continue.
When Steem fails and you're all left holding bags, I'm going to do nothing but laugh and tell you "I told you so".
Fucking cowards.
https://steemit.com/patheticwhales/@berniesanders/you-know-steemit-is-fucked-when
I tried to speak up but, but I was flagged to shit and received a shit ton of threats and harassment messages. I was contacted by someone I know telling me some whales a getting together and are going to flag me and my @buildawhale users to shit.
I realized no one really cared and just said fuck it. No sense taking the brunt of all the attacks if no one will do anything.
Was recently updated by these whales
My response
And this is where the real dick move lies - threatening you is one thing. But threatening your customers - is on a whole 'nother level - far down the wasteline.
If the whole stake holding community decide to not protect @buildawhale customers either they're not worth protecting or the system is completely broken.
I vote for the former.
with all due respect - if the system is broken, it's not up to you to fix it with your SP. it's up to the witnesses to be convinced that the system needs fixing and do so in a way that is sustainable and better for everyone.
I agree that vote selling is not ideal but it is a symptom of a system where minnows have no other way to gain any sort of clout and whales can earn a very good income just from sneezing.
I see vote bots as an equalisation measure, and hopefully in future steemit as a platform improves to the level where it is no longer needed.
It's not even up to the witnesses - the witnesses would be the one who activate/approve a fix to the system. Its up to Steemit Inc, or some enterprising developer who understands the code, to actually implement the solution and propose it to the witnesses.
well there you go - that's good to know - as a fairly new user the whole witness model is a bit foreign to me, i just try to make sense of it as best i can. Thanks.
No problem! There's no good explanation of all this anywhere, so no fault on you for not knowing :)
He is one of the worst abusers of the platform. That's why he is getting so upset and threatening. Instead of helping fix the haejin issue. He continues to upvote his comments and his alts comments.
Clutch pic, Nic.
Feedback on my proposed partial solution to this issue is welcomed - generosity rank / 'vote spread' algorithm.
Already been done with Steemfollower. It doesn't seem to be catching on, because nobody wants to change anything around here.
I just looked at steemfollower - but I don't really see how their service is equivalent to the generosity algorithm.
@themarkymark this is so old already. No ill will to you. No more flags.
I ask everyone to settle down with the bad actions. So counter productive.
I'm focusing on a new role and retiring on crypto. May your steem account grow as you do!
It's not old bro... grumpydick is still attacking honest people here for nothing. My bot was just threatened by him this morning. He's backed by no one, just throwing weight around.
Just saying don't get stuck in downward sinking spirals. I don't agree with everyone but I don't despise anyone either. Easy to get drawn in. Effort to remove. Just be yourself!
be positive. Be wise.
Well said.
:D you might not realise people are being themselves, greedy and scared :D
Who da fook is dat guy @haejin?
this is funn
this is under appreciated
Lmao we've moved the figure to 7% now?
His content is not garbage, it's some of the best content on steem. Miles ahead of anything you, grumpycat or the shit whale has ever posted.
I estimated it to be around 7% when he is not flagging and his VP has recovered. He is somewhere between 4-5% right now and was 5% yesterday.
7%+ is what I predicted originally before all the flagging and optimized voting.
"At the moment, everything is off the radar." LOL. I am glad that their threats are not silencing you.
That is my answer!
I'm doing steem just for fun and to kill time. sooooo..
well we will have one more dictator in a few months of time, I'm wondering why @abit and the other whales that were running the whales no vote experiment haven't banded up again, although it would be like a state police in some cases I don't see a problem moderating someone that doesn't know moderation and is ok with being top 1 spammer of the year
I really don’t like that SteemIt is forming authoritarian gangs of sorts...
Omg I’m so lost in the drama what the hell is happening? Plz some explain from the beginning
Small time capitalists angry with the larger capitalists for being more successful at cheating/stealing via bots than they are at stealing/cheating using bots.
Would not expect any less from anything created in this society. Small number of greedy assholes try to steal from everyone else. That's capitalism in a nutshell. You are giving your money away to these people by dumping money into a system you know someone is going to leverage to your detriment. Stop investing and just use the place as a blog/youtube replacement and the whales only have themselves to steal from. People are willingly investing in a bot managed pyramid scheme...
I've voted you (@themarkymark) for witness after reading this post, if you know more witnesses that worth to vote for i would appreciate some suggestions, steemit seems to me a very interesting proyect that i think worth to defend.
Thanks ;)
This is what he has "pending". That is for 7 days. Do the math. Whether his content is good or not, it is simply too much.
This is a result of people continuing to vote for his posts. Stop! Vote for someone else and the problem goes away.
This guy is making almost as much as a CEO of a corporation would.. Just crazy
nobody can make that much through their own labor
Wow ! & I still wait to see my post to get just the decimal part 😬😬😹😹😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁
Hey @haejin help some minnows with one weeks payout 😬😬😁😁
You're very correct...... Its way too much
Wow really ? I want all those sbd to fix my life
Wow that's crazy... I'd say he will be rich enough soon to not even need Steemit anymore.
he doesnt need it now he's just here to be a dick
What a sad thing that is.
Even if the guy invented the freakin Bible in 7 days, it would not be worth 28,822 SBD. This really feels like some giant ponzi scheme (at best it is crony capitalism).
Your Voting Power goes down if you hammer it too much. We should also have Posting Power to assist with reward volume.
There’s so many users making way too much for what they’re putting out! Honestly, most Steem users fall into this category.
hi
Here is a small spammy account for your flagging practice.
People are making money off of steem?! Oh the humanity!
someone think of the children lol
We really need to do something against 100k $ a week rewards for posts that are pretty much a gamble and in worst case scenario are taking advantage of the readers that follow the trades.
It's actually only one SUPER Whale that gives Haejin's post most of its value. I was a supporter of Haejin because I use to think he cared about the analysis that he put out. Now it just looks like a game to see how much money he can get from his post. Just my own personal opinion.
And psychologically, people are more likely to take highly upvoted posts seriously, and upvote them too.
Agree and that is used and abused here at Steemit by more members than just this guy, unfortunately.
Such a good point @poet -- which is kind of the point, that good posts should be upvoted, but there is definitely some scandal at play :/
he does good analysis, but apparently greed has taken over.
Well said. Totally agree with that.
Well said, indeed! Here's my vote)
People build a brand they expect to be paid for it
Otherwise they can do charity and join Hare Krishna
What we really need is analysis of analysis
Cut to the core of the crap. And show they're just wasting you time, your LIFE reading it. Or worse still misleading you into losing money investing (gambling) or deliberatly robbing you
He never ever comments or answers questions to his own posts while he also leaves out the most important part of his predications, how he determines the targets.
Haejin was getting 3000+ views and 250+ votes before ranchorelaxo ever voted for him. If you want a lot of votes and attention from whales, try to do what haejin does. Provide quality content that your fans want to see, bring fans in from other platforms, get your fans to purchase sp to support you.
That sounds like WORK
Easier to make music on MTV Money for nothing and your chicks for free
I agree , help those that help you.
@acidyo so why voting for this kind of post. I don't understand
@acidyo, ok man but what?! Let's say we all downvote @haejin for reaping to much rewards. He can just easily transfer the SP that is upvoting him to another account and do his trick elsewhere, or if he's smart 25 different accounts.
In my opinion a downvoting campaign will accomplish nothing. What will? Healthy competition and hard-working mentality. Elliot Wave analysis regarding cryptocurrencies, which is an extremely popular topic on Steemit, is a monopoly market now because it's new. It's owned by Haejin, the first-mover. This is not sustainable as there is no entry barrier for competitors. Anyone can start up business next door. That brings me to my closing remark:
I thought we liked that about this system, the only power on this platform is Steem Power..? Just become popular or buy a lot of SP if you want to influence the reward pool according to your own standards....
You don't have to downvote anyone.
The reward pool is fixed and is shared out in proportion. So upvoting someone else is equivalent in value to downvoting haejin in terms of percentages.
The real problem is that the rest of the community isn't upvoting enough. They could easily counter the whales by going on voting sprees and voting for deserving articles (the articles the whales vote for then get less of a reward percentage).
If you want to stop abuse the most efficient way is to go out on a voting spree and the more people who do this, the more effective it will be.
because, whats the point when your vote is literally worth less than .01? wasting votes. i vote on posts and comments i think are good content. but it has no impact.
although this is annoying and disturbing drama to be observing as a newb, its an important topic to the future of steemit. if im going to invest 6-8 hours a day writing one post that might get 1$, its worth following this pissing contest a bit. So, here i am trying to make sense of it.
your suggestion sounds good, but doesnt seem like it would even put a dent in the problem because minnows still wouldnt be able to effectively participate in directing the future of this platform. 0.01 vote helps no one. all it does is drain your inconsequential voting power.
the people who are earning so much, good for them, i guess. some of them. whales complaining all over the place how whats his face is basically cheating, yet are not helping minnows get stronger to join in. there are way more minnows here than witnesses and whales. so when you say everyone should upvote other people, ummm. minnows are but its bascially null and void, at the mercy of a whale or curation team for a couple of crumbs. there are some curation teams which are super inspiring because they truly are giving benefit to the community. helping others.
lastly, is steemit going to be a social platform where only discussions on crypto have value? i was under the impression it was supposed to be an all inclusive diverse world wide social network. why are MORE whales and Witnesses NOT bumping up minnows? is it because of greed? afraid to lose power? because thats sure what it looks like. if you think everyone should just start upvoting everyone else, minnows need a whole shit ton more leverage. sorry so long
If thousands of minnows are voting, then it adds up as far as the reward pool goes.
The problem is that most minnows think like you do and are not bothering - and that attitude hands power to the whales.
Not true! We ARE voting! As I said, I'm commenting and upvoting every single day at an easily weakened 100%. Maybe 10 votes a day before I'm slapped on the wrist with loss of voting strength from participating too much. How is that giving more power to the whales? I'm voting on stuff that's really well constructed by people who are investing their soul into the content they're creating. It's just like real life. My vote has no direct effect but I'm sure as hell going to vote anyway for the reason that I like SUPPORTING the people who are doing a great job.
i was trying to emphasize my point which is a little hard to show through text sometimes. so i wanted to clarify, reading my response to you in my head, i was not screaming hahaha. i was being animated but not angry for what its worth.
Elliot waves are far from infallible. If his chart analysis was that good he wouldn’t need to be taking anything from the reward pool.
so true, if his TA was so good then why does he have the need to take rewards for steemit? he is money hungry in my opinion and if he really cared about the community he would ask the whale upvoting him to stop, let devout minnow followers dictate how much his blogs are worth, not a HUGE whale!
I think you're right, @steemitromney. He's winning right now because he doesn't have competition. If his work truly is garbage (I don't know anything about Elliot Wave analysis, so I can't tell), then what needs to happen is that there need to be a few accounts that regularly debunk his work, or if it works. At least that's in theory what would level out the playing field. But I'm convinced that a good majority of the upvotes are coming from low-level bots that he's controlling. He's moneyballing the system. We'd need someone to do a network analysis of the voting activity towards his account to gain some certainty on that though.
I learned and am still learning Elliot Wave analysis from Haejin, and I post my scribblings at my blog here. Your welcome to follow and upvote mine analytics :)
lol
The guy is practically raping the reward system with extreme greed and we all are just looking ..only Bernie is fighting this war ...where are the witnesses...I am not against him making 1K daily but let it be one good post, max 2 daily...One is even enough for him because he crowds all the tags and no space for others to even shine..this is not good for the ecosystem-especially posts based on speculations. Thanks for posting this Bernie, hope all see this post and someone do something...10x posts daily!!! damn...
Steemit Inc , please do a daily post limit!!! 1 post a day will be great...2 max however if we reach 1M + members then 1 post max a day will reduce this type of greed.
There was a time when 4 posts/day was the max before a diminishing returns algorithm kicked in. last I knew, Golos still uses this system, but are planning a fork to add the current Steemit code, and while I like the single 7-day payout window, I don't care for the spammer reward system.
It's beyond just making more money than you're worth. He's taking part in something that respectable news outlets disallow for a reason. Using a follower base to influence the price of a low cap asset. It is his followers fault if they get burned to an extent, but it doesn't make it okay.
The bigger the following & hype, the more his pics behave as he predicts, till they don’t
I don't agree with post limits , we can deal with this in a different way .
i honestly don't mind it but can we put all of em in one post instead of multiple haha
Yeah, that's basically it. There's just too many posts in one day with info that could very well be put in one post. I don't mind the info/speculation perse, just that it's in so many posts as to milk for the most possible rewards.
Kind of makes you start missing those days of max 3-4 posts a day!
Well I agree @playfulnoodle, maybe this is what we should do is curb accounts from posting ad finitum like this ?? I dont like what i am seeing, @haeijin is not the only person I see making too many short and repetetive styled posts of frankly not much interest ! We need to get the quality back up I feel so yeah why not go back to limiting the number of posts again ! Three posts for most people would be too much no ?? If they were good posts that is with content which is nicely put together with thought !
I'd say that. I don't think people would be able to create many more good quality posts on one day, 7 days a week. I sometimes write a couple of posts more on a day, but that's to have some in advance, you can spread those out over the week instead of spamming all in one day.
His votes of "not much interest" over 10000 views and hundreds to thousands of votes. Maybe others find different things of interest.
yes no doubt @danpaulson, but crypto market posts are not my source of interest here i can tell you that ) But then thats me, Im not everybody else ofcourse !!
A daily report would be fine.
I can see your point , just hope it doesn't lead to post limits because I post about different topics daily & sometimes post more than other days.
I believe you should create a system to compensate small users that find situations like that......I detected some....how will I denounce it? I will make enemies....will the system compensate me if I denounce? that is the point
-18?
How the fuck is that even possible, who did you piss off?
I know there was a whale war but I thought it was sorted out.
@berniesanders @acidyo The solution is you need more whales downvoting - like @adm and such.
Minnows are worried about losing their tiny incomes.
Thus.. More whales like bernie need to grow some balls! Otherwise haejin may as well ramp up the 12 posts per day. The longer this is left untouched the stronger they become.
Then who can defend the reward pool rape?
Need to nip this in the bud sooner before it's too late.
Unfortunately it isn't our scope as we would be accused of content moderation.
Although I personally think that such abuse like haejin destroys this platform.
Why @haejin has to post almost every hour? Why are they keep on upvoting? Should we listen to the warnings of @berniesanders and @acidyo? Or else...we could all loose.
@acidyo if you really think that it is worth your time and effort to "do something against 100k a week rewards" then I honestly do wish you well in your task. Totally serious. I am starting to wonder about the amounts he is receiving and if it is any of MY business. Because small or not I upvote and resteem most of his posts! But I ponder if perhaps in making your own rewards you would forget about @haejin and his totally evil plot. Or what ever wrong he continues to reek upon the landscape of steem. No one has ever explained WHY it is so bad what haejin is doing and WHO he is hurting.
Until some bounty was placed upon him, and a war call cried out, haejin was a nobody! Now he is a somebody. How big is his body count before war was brought to him? None. Best to leave it alone.
It would be really great if he could post it in one or two posts a day.. this is too much.. but im sad there are no rules against this kind of problem..
That, and people flooding the site by re-posting content from other web sources to get upvotes. There should be some differentiation between copy and past postings and original content.
There is it's called @originalworks
I tried @originalworks a couple of times on my posts and never got any feedback. And posts were 100% genuine and original, even the images. I am new to it, so I perhas missed sth about @OriginalWorks
Agree... And what about these other Steemians who take a LOT of money from the reward pool every single day with mediocre to bad posts? The circle jerk groups? Something is really broken in Steemit and we have to find a solution for it to prevent this community to fall apart at some point in time, and Steem value to suffer from it. Soon, Steemit will have competition, and the monopoly is gone!
Problem is ego and greed for money. @haejin flagged fundraiser for me from 50$ to 0$. Who flag fundraiser? Only moron!
Link about it
That is a sad story man and respectless behaviour.
When ego take control of someone this is what happens...
Can anybody name those circlejerk groups by name???
I noticed quite a lot!
Too many!!!
Indeed. In the wise words of John Templeton, "don't confuse brains with a bull market."
Are u serious? 2 of the last 3 presidents were put in office by the electoral college who went against the results of the popular vote for the other candidate. That system can be corrupted too.
Lots of people in positions of power across the world are also as you described. You left out all the people in both categories who are religious and not morons as well as those who are not religious or stupid who do good for the people around the world. Bad argument imo
first of all, you are going off on a totally different tangent than what this entire drama is all about.
we are not talking about religions. you are wanting to pivot the discussion to focus on religions but this is not about how many people in the world are christian or any other type of religion.
id also like to point out that even within religions people do not all believe the same way. to say that people are stupid and incapable of making sound judgements for themselves because they are religious is flat out cognitive dissonance because, again, you are failing to account for the fact that many of the US's Lawmakers are themselves religious. The same goes for around the world. People in general are religious so, again, your argument fails.
Which, by the way, the lawmakers in America, are actively and aggressively working to pass laws directly related to their particular flavor of religion. the founding fathers wanted church and state to be separate for that very reason, yet here we are in 2017 with lawmakers passing laws dictating what women can and cannot do with their bodies, as just one example.
so, please save the bs for someone else who more gullible. youll probably have some kind of retort but im not going to respond anymore because youre projecting your views about religion onto a discussion that is actually focused on economic politics within the steemit platform.
We used to have a solution for this, it was the four post limit.
in my opinion, it should be set up so that the net effect of user A voting on User B's posts, diminishes with each subsequent vote within a reasonable period of time (ie, a week, or a month, etc). That should apply whether up or down. 1 user should not be able to completely "make or break" another user.
If i vote for you, with my voting power, you'll get about 0.07. If i vote for you again within a day or so that reward should then be 0.035. after that, 0.0175, and so on. The same thing should happen when I vote for myself. Votes should be encouraged to be applied to others throughout the community, and not concentrated between few people.
I've argued for this concept as well, which you can find implemented in many games. "Diminishing Returns" is the concept, where each subsequent related action is less impactful than the last. Many others raised objections to the complex nature of how it would have to be implemented, but it would definitely reduce the impact one person should have over another.
The same effect could be applied to both up and down votes.
something being complex is no reason to not implement something - implementing a social network onto a blockchain is also pretty complex but they did that.....
lets hope sense prevails..
One of the other reasons was that you could simply bypass it with a little effort, at least in terms of taking rewards from the pool.
If User A continuously upvotes User B, and diminishing rewards is implemented, User B could just create 100 accounts and post once on each account, and User A could upvote all of those posts from different users to bypass the diminishing returns.
That's one way around it.
However, it would still prevent User A from constantly upvoting B, and it would prevent downvoting in the same manner.
my answer to that would be for that kind of activity to be considered abuse - and for the witnesses to have the power to deal with accounts created soley for abuse.
it also makes it a lot harder though. user A would have to keep creating 100 accounts every couple of weeks as those first 100 accounts would lose effectiveness.
Well, diminishing returns wouldn't last forever between User A + User B I'd imagine. I don't think you should be penalized for voting for the same person once a week for a year for example. The diminishing aspect itself might kick in on the 2nd or 3rd vote for the same person on the same day, but it'd also replenish over time. So they'd eventually be able to recycle through those 100 accounts as the effects started to wear off.
It does make it harder, but in the end it doesn't solve the problem fully. It would however prevent people from focusing and picking on specific individuals, which also would make it harder to fight actual abuse :(
The entire situation is hard to find a proper solution for, which is why no one has jumped on implementing a solution.
At this point I think the entire rewards system may need to be fundamentally changed, maybe built from the ground up, in order to truly solve the problems at hand.
Originally posted in the /f/undefined forum on chainBB.com (learn more).
Yea but if user B used all 100 accounts to do it each time, it would be the same effect. And if B only used 1 account at a time, then the abuse was reduced by 100. Not bad.
That's a pretty good idea. I suggested something similar in the past.
it's an obvious flaw and it needs attention. If someone is rich enough, they can pretty much take over the whole network. you've got a pretty high reputation, and a fair bit of voting weight behind you - but someone can pretty much wipe out your reputation with a sustained attack if they have enough voting weight.
At my level - it wouldn't take much to wipe out my reputation. It's a form of censorship, as if i piss off the wrong whale they can effectively silence me.
I've mention this several times but no one ever listens
The post limit constraint should be applied again, specifically in regards to the number of posts that one can author and seek rewards for in a given time period. Any posts made afterwards could automatically default to "Decline Payout." In this manner, community engagement for the sake of engagement would be fostered, while still rewarding quality content.
Unfortunately the "Money Talks" slogan doesn't really convey this. Steemit has a marketing problem and it is tarnishing the public's perception of the steem blockchain. This is what ultimately needs to be addressed if steem is ever going to grow and sustain value.
The four post limit used to work "behind the scenes". You could post as much as you want, but when you have more then four per day, a penalty would get applied to your post rewards.
The penalty wasn't even really that bad for 5 or 6 posts.
It was an elegant system and it worked just fine for many months. It was removed without any real discussion or reason behind it.
Can Steemit implement it only for some users that are obviously draining reward pool?
in that regard, is there a place where all these unspoken rules are stated? The whole "upvoting rewards vs time after posting" is still a mystery to me, and seems to have changed a bit over time and I cannot find anywhere where up-to-date info exists... The 4-post rule seems like another one of those rules that I heard about a long time ago, but only through other people commenting on it...
Thanks, again, stinc, et al.
I would reduce it to 1.
Yeah, maybe 1 post and also some limit on comments.
One seems a bit much. We had the four post limit for a pretty long time, and it worked perfectly. I really don't understand why it was removed.
That was one of the mysteries at the time, why it was removed who knows, I bet you they didn't foresee all the damage that caused. Maybe they did it to keep the number of blockchain transactions on an uptrend.
If only one blog per day would be too restrictive, perhaps 1 blog per day would get sbd rewards, the rewards on remaining allowed posts per day would go to steem power.
I think we should use up our posting power similar to the way we use up our voting power. It might also keep down the number of "Great Post" spam comments. People could be more motivated to contribute to discussions that interest them.
Wouldn't stop it, they'd just use multiple accounts.
You know, this isn't some crazy idea that I just made up. We had this, it was fine, it was good and it worked. Did people make multiple accounts to get around the four post limit in the past? Generally speaking, no.
I never said it was a crazy idea, I'm just saying it's an artificial limitation that would get in the way of legitimate usage.
These kinds of limitations are what we have in the 20-second window too - which also needs to be removed.
The problem isn't "how many times can I post in a day", nor is it the solution.
With the n2 to discourage self voting?
Or at least a sigmoid curve?
Exactly!!!!!
Thats some aggressive posting!
Wadda pile of ever growing hemispherical neglect & hemispherical blindness we have to witness everyday!! Shessh!! 😈
LOL!
LOL
wtf o.O
Exactlly @newlive Is it me or is this a big "shit on capitalism" post? I mean, I don't think a capitalistic model is the best for producing quality content anyway. Look at the reduction in quality of manufactured goods over the last 5 decades. You can thank capitalism for that. But yeah, greed is a motivating factor for sure. LOL!
"Lol" getting $52.92
lol when i clicked on this post, my computer crashed. Must be telling me something
LOL.....it's just a hoax. he is part of the system he is complaining about. See how much it he lost is taking barely an hour.
you are right. clickbait and upvote bot. sad!
IRS!
How is BCC trevon?
@lasseehlers and you earned how much?
That would not be good, if it where I could make money by just going on a flagging spree.
Who cares what another user is doing?
Why the envy? Focus on that which you can control.. Make better content, interact with the community, buy Steem on the dips, and vote for your own content if you want - you will make money...
How the heck did you get over 7,700 steem? Did you buy it all?
Feedback on my proposed partial solution to this issue is welcomed - generosity rank / 'vote spread' algorithm.
I would love to do something to this account, but my powers is next to nothing and will not make any difference. What I've done to further qualify if this account is useful or not:
Even when this guys predictions are good, I think taking 100s of dollars per post times 10 to 20 posts per day from the reward pool; combined with his partial explanations on how he does the predications; Just looks a bit outrageous to me.
That said, we have more Steemians taking 1000s of dollars from the reward pool every single day, with not that great posts as well. An ongoing BIG PROBLEM within our community. Auto voting in a circle jerk style.
Note: Self voted for visibility!
You don't have to do anything to that account. Just stop voting for it, and vote for other people's posts.
As someone pointed out, a vote for someone else is equivalent to a downvote for the bad actor, because the reward pool is fixed and shared out via percentages.
Basically it needs the community to go on a mass voting spree for good posts, and the amount the bad posts get will automatically shrink without anyone having to do anything explicit.
Problem is that the majority of the SP holders are in circle jerk or vote for these type of accounts.
As a decentralized platform both reward inequality and abusing bot votes both can be solved with courage, intelligence and some sacrifice in a decentralized ways.
1-2M SP from collective source or few whales to encounter @haejin like scenario. If a whale can upvote 8-10 of his posts to $300 so can another account with 2M can downvote his 7-9 post to equalize the situation.
Making a channel for reporting bot vote abuse. Once a user is identified , he/she will be flagged and banned from bot voting similar to flagged by @chitah or @steemcleaners. The abuser will make another account, therefore, it will be a continuous process. Therefore, the fund and initiative should come from the bot owner association. Since it is their responsibility to guard this abuse not TOS but action.
It is never possible to fight all these abusers, also they will evolve to find more loopholes. Therefore, actions should evolve too. A dedicated chat channel, 2M SP fund for vote equalization (why not if there are numerous underground or open channel for circle-jerk voting ), an association to fight bot vote abuse from bot owners.
Whoa! A Reasonable Solution!?
What's this all about now? Is there a call to action I missed, or are you just hating on everyone?
Yawn.
Steemit works.
Steem has value on the exchanges.
Something-something increasing market capitalization...
What's your problem, man?
Still in his position, would you ?
Gotta admit that's too much, one reward from one of those posts would be enough, for someone that posts daily. I mean, it's not even about how much money you are trying to make from this, but how fast you really wanna do it? Trying to make a million dollares in one day? Is that it? I like rewards just as much as anybody else, but honestly I would feel bad if I got this much for such a subjective content. And this comes from someone that is trying to do something quite similiar and that upvotes is own posts, in the effort to make them more ...visible?, appealing?.
Anyway, thats pure greed, nothing else.
Hi,brother your post is excellent writing.Thank for your vote.Please vote me . I need a your voting
Only a handful of people here can appreciate how much cynical irony fills this thread and its comments section.
The way this system is programmed, makes it a game of abuse which will fail itself.
This comment is not an expression of support of the thread's initiator, of any of the commentators, or of the user whom is referred to by the subject of the thread, since if anything, those complaining about him and about each other commit worse abuse than he does, even if some of them are less successful in it.
This is so not right. How on earth should dis be allowed. This is fucking rewardpool rape and killing steem. Something has to be done. And i am sure there are many more raping the pool same way too. WTF!!!!!!
sososo painful,you see very good content getting 1.2 while a comment of "lol" get huge pay, it's ridiculous and what ever they are doing, should stop or else they will CRASH this goodwill platform
As a trader that posts about the markets as well, I agree with you - to seek payouts on that many posts a day for chart analysis is ridiculous. Traders post this type of analysis for free everyday on platforms such as Stocktwits and Twitter.
When I author posts, I try to consider longer term time frames in my analysis - it is impossible to trade the markets profitably on a day to day basis in the manner the cited author above is insinuating by the titles of his posts, which regularly include the word "profit"!
But it points to an inherent flaw within Steemit itself and this has only been realized with time. I would contend that there should be a cap on the number of posts that one can author on any given day and seek payouts for. If the cap is exceeded, then the rewards for posts made afterwards would automatically default to "Decline Payout" until the next day. A similar constraint could be applied to comments.
What this would do is encourage users to put their best foot forward when contributing content to the platform. Authors get 75% of the rewards on posts here; therefore, the quality of the content should be commensurate with this sizeable distribution.
Thankfully this platform is no longer the stand alone proof of concept for the potential of the steem blockchain. However, it still is the predominant face of it. Like Utopian, it's about time that Steemit encourages more quality commentary, not quantity.
Quite some time ago only four fully rewarded posts per day were possible. Why not implementing that again (or even reduce the number to two posts)? One could consider it for comments as well ... Witnesses really should think about it.
I know from your other comments that you care about the platform. Maybe you are interested in some other suggestions I have made some time ago to improve it:
'Conciliation' of the reward curves?
Ideas for more justice on Steemit.
I would like to see this platform succeed. A long-standing concern for me has been that the unaddressed problems seemingly rampant throughout Steemit are steering attention away from the potential of the blockchain itself. And it's not like these solutions require extensive rework - as you noted, there used to be a cap on the number of rewarded posts per day, and that cap could easily be reintroduced.
With newer initiatives being built on top of the steem blockchain, such as Utopian, Dtube, and Dsound, I have only recently grown to appreciate its inherent potential again. The SP delegation feature could potentially attract serious interest and capital flow from the broader crypto community as I liken it to the potential of passive cash flow via proof of stake in other cryptos.
And speaking of other cryptocurrencies, I wrestle with steem's valuation relative to them. Ned Scott, the CEO of Steemit Inc, has openly declared on Twitterthat he feels steem should be a Top 10 crypto. Yet when I read through threads like this, I scratch my head at what exactly Ned might be thinking, considering all of the problems here.
Maybe his thought process is that Steemit isn't the stand alone proof of concept for the blockchain anymore, so its problems can be kicked down the road. Yet these issues need systemic solutions to help improve the perception of the blockchain and its valuation. It's obvious that until this occurs from the top down, we're all just brainstorming while whales will proceed to flag each other and pursue arbitrarily defined self-policing initiatives rather than calling for constructive changes that are applied to users across the board.
Disclaimer: I am just a bot trying to be helpful.
If the system is broken... fix the system, hardfork. Unless maybe too many of those accounts are actually being run by the people in charge of said forks...
Not necessary. The system just needs to be used as it was designed.
@berniesanders, I have to agree with @secondstar. I feel your pain and believe Steemit could be a better place, free from corrupt whales and such. However, your cry for justice depends on the decency of others and their will power to "rise up." History has shown that to be rarely the case. If people were capable of doing what you are asking then the human race would have abolished government a long time ago. But unfortunately, the masses are not capable of self-governing yet, and so it will probably take a hard fork to fix the problem. Idealistically this shouldn't be necessary and idealistically your call for Steemit justice should should be heeded, but we don't live in an idealistic world.
Technically, it is. It was designed to allow self votes... of any amount. And it was designed to say money is power. He has money, and thus the power to self vote.
Setting a max % of the rewards pool would solve all of this and make perfect sense as a precautionary line of code... except the people who code it are likely using self votes as well for big paydays.
Meanwhile, shit like this is why people are really leaving, and zilch is being done to fight it:
Thanks @berniesanders for bringing attention to this again and again. Unfortunately I am a coward too, but at least I have the excuse that he can kill my rep and rewards with just a couple of flags :( Come on @ned what are you doing?
Yeah that's pretty ridiculous, Im hoping for great things for steem. If theres more smart media tokens and new ways of doing stuff that require burning lots of steem then steem's price may rise to some nice levels, but not if these whales keep absorbing all the new steem being created...how is steem going to hit $100 if it means these clowns get $40,000 per garbage post?
At some point there will be more visibility on this, and it will keep every legitimate investor in STEEM from buying in. Any actual business or big name thinking about building a platform here will think twice when behavior like this is allowed to go on.
I agree. It's discouraging that this isn't being addressed from the top down by Steemit Inc.
Utopian is an attempt at doing so - they have strict guidelines on the quality of posts they expect from contributors. But it targets a specific audience of writers.
On a platform as large as Steemit though, it would be impossible to moderate in a similar manner. So the tools to discourage this type of behavior have to be built into the mechanics of the interface and applied to all users equitably. One way is to simply limit the number of posts that one can seek rewards for during a specified time period.
Isn't Steem supposed to stay near $1 instead of rising to high values like $100?
According to the FAQ:
Will 1 Steem Dollar always be worth $1.00 USD?
SBD apparently is supposed to be pegged to 1 USD but the market decides the price which is around $6.24
Steems price also is decided by the market, if there are more smart media tokens, kinda like icos, using the steem blockchain, if we grow to millions of users, and if theres new ways to burn steem for whatever purpose, then I can easily see steem going to $100...SBD though is confusing to me lol but who knows maybe the price of that can go just as high
check out https://steemd.com and you will see the overview of the chain and the economics, there is a price feed being updated by the witnesses that calculates the rewards, the SBD is supposed to be pegged to a dollar and that is how the rewards are calculated, the system doesn't know it's being traded at 6USD outside and if it was the whole math would be different, but it is what it is .... quite sad
Supposed to be pegged but definitely not functioning that way. I like that it’s not pegged going into potential huge dollar inflation. But I don’t like that it’s supposed to be pegged & not functioning correctly
You are only a false brave.
What are you upset about? The analyst's analysis or something else? I'm a little confused, and I follow that guy. Is there something I should know?
We should limit 3- 4 posts per day per user.
Lemme get this straight: you're calling on people to do the right thing?
Yeah, something is wrong. It's called
"greed as the primary motivating factor for determining content quality."
This system is working exactly as it should for those who care to use it to make money. Is the system designed to produce the quality content it purports to do? Probably not. Does it make people money. Yes.
Should the system be fixed?
If you think this system is just for producing quality content then it definitely has some major problems. If you think the system is just for making money, you're in the right place, and nothing is wrong.
@haejin is only interested in money, nothing else! If his first intention was to help others he woudn't flag fundraisers. One guy suprised me with fundraiser for me and @haejin moron flagged it to 0. What kind of pathetic moron you must be to flag fundraiser? You can read more about it here
hey it is what it is you are the enemy, he can do whatever with his power ...
...and that is feeding his ego.
oh shit I may be in the Wrong place....
False brave.
I apologize for not doing more. To be honest, after the truce or whatever I kind of felt a little dejected and wondered if a better course of action would be to just encourage mass raping of the pool the way Grumpy did. It would force the issue, if nothing else. But I can't really see myself as being able to carryout that plan long term.
Also, it doesn't help that that his rep is so high. With none of the other upper whales eager to help address the issue, he would be able to run my rep into the ground. It never stopped me from speaking out and speaking my mind, but I didn't really see how my downvoting him would be able to really help the issue.
This isn't over though.
I will not even mention two people who were promoting shitconnect and now returned to steem and they're posts are on the trending page! People have a short memory...
What I don't understand is most of us are just minnows... Privets in this war and you are a whale that has several whales.... U criticize us about attacking reward pool rapist but then you hand us BB guns and tell us to go march to our death. Meanwhile you have all the artillery you need fight this war but you're keeping it all to yourself. Now I'm not talking about giving up any of your steem or your steem power but up voting us enough so we get a decent reward so we have some steem power of our own and actually give us a fighting chance the flag these rapist. I believe in the fight you're fighting I've even though as far as to delegate what little steem power I have to your Bots in the hope that every little ounce counts. You have plenty of us following you ready to march into war but give us the tools to help fight.
So people making GOOD QUALLITY CONTENT on this site and spending their money to boost their posts get flagged for some reason but this thing is OK? Who ruins the site more some one who boosts their content that explains the inner workings of SteemIt or some one who just spams 10 qucik posts a day and makes x10 more while doing the same?!
I have never upvoted this guy ever since i saw the posts about him but what else can i do other than boycot?!
Absolutely right
I will be delegating some of my SP to spam bots when my power down is done. That's how I will be helping. Until then I refrain from voting or supporting people who are taking advantage through using their popularity and SP to game the system.
I've seen the same posts you meant, but bernie is right here. You have to realize the harsh critique he gives is in your best interest, it is all under the guise of making the platform fair for all of us. Not have any single user generating an obscene amount of money, while offering almost nothing for the community.
maybe now you see why @dan was "trolling" ozchart, I don't see why nobody's getting into this although it could be bloody, anyways this is a flawed system since day1, in the hands of the few that don't really know what to do :)
The trending page is ridiculous and I bet haejin doesn't care since he just came in here and spammed technical analysis ... well people are bound to be selfish, although you are a controversial person here @berniesanders I've always seem some merit in your "OG trollism" I can't say it's a way to change anything or show your perspective but it's your choice and I liked the fact someone was willing to speak up and stand up to the "ruling elite" steemit team
That was a wile ago tho ;)
Well it is what it is, money drain and ned is probably happy SBD is going down because of his fantastical financial game theory skills :)
.... bs bs :D
I've written multiple articles on possible ways to fix this specific issue that would reduce payouts, I have put my stake on the line:
I have exhausted my resources and I have barely made I dent. But that doesn't matter. At the end of the day, I did something to try and fix the problem.
The system is on the line. There are no gods on this platform. So go and let your voice be heard. The blockchain has granted you a voice and yet you remain quiet. Even the smallest minnows make a difference in the aggregate.
No user is bigger than the community. So let's show them that. Or continue to do nothing. My doubts about Proof-of-Stake are growing. Is this truly better than the current system? Only a true community is able to solve it's problems, so stop pretending and put your money where your mouth is.
I will give you 100% support for this...
Reason is this egomaniac flagged to 0$ fundraiser @hendrix22 put up for me. What kind idiot you must be to flag fundraiser? That show @haejin to only looking for himself. If he really have honest intention to others and wanted to help others with his crypto predictions, he woudn't flag fundraiser. Here is story about it: Link
Steemit is decentralized but money makes it centralized. What if a multi-billionaire joins steemit, buys 1 billion steem and powered it up? What will happen? It actually depends on the multi-billionaire's purpose. He can do what he wants (i'm referring to a male multi-billionaire). Money can turn decentralized to centralized or vice-versa. Money is infinite numbers. It has no end. It can circulate the entire universe. Even our minds and bodies are controlled by money!
This sort of continuous infighting between you two is harmful for the platform. and yet you throw dirt on minnows that just choose to upvote a post- it's not their fault.
Sure, so we should just let him take 5%+ of the reward pool, shouldn't we? Go ahead and bend over, it's coming!
some people clearly enjoy anal adventures, this seems to go back to a hands off approach or (giving zero fu**s on how users are affected, I don't always look at the tentacles ...but for the head of the Hydra, and there are a couple) time for Medusa?
Bravo.
And he's throwing dirt because he loves the drama, and the payday that comes with it.
I agree, his posts are of low quality. and his followers are promoting that. but they are allowed to, I mean they can be criticized for it but they're free to choose
wasn't there an agreement made?
he follow and upvote I follow and upvote back
he follow and upvote I follow and upvote back
Yeah, this haejin guy should just do a daily report and since he's making killer predictions, should decline rewards for the posts once a while
Hey @berniesanders Tell us how you really feel about @haejin. :)
What do you expect me to do? My downvote has a value of 0.010. I don't even care about crypto news.
It's the same shit but with a different smell!!! 💩
@berniesanders, What did you tell us? Maybe include a link to your previous post(s).
Son, I understand you. I have upvoted you.
ikr? hes the only one who's said anything about it:p
but why police someone for writing especially on steem.
i wouldnt mind anyone posting anything non violent
Flag that shit!
I admit I'm one of those cowards