Would be cooler if they didn't misrepresent themselves as saying they make no profit when they very clearly make curation rewards while simultaneously condemning Whaleshares as "vote buying" when we only release the whaleshare tokens through contests and rewarding people who have benefited the community and the beyondbit token as a means of creating funding for various crypto projects by giving them tokens to upvote their posts and only make curation rewards too. Furthermore, since our tokens are only released to minnows participating in contests as a means of helping the community instead of whatever posts are being promoted which is clearly an effort to maximize those curation rewards I find the remarks about being not for profit incredibly deceptive.
personally, I kind of hate the fact that promoted posts "burn" money. enough crypto is burned off already just by people losing their keys and such, so why "accelerate" the process. perhaps this made more sense when the annual inflation rate of STEEM was 100% or so annually.
I think I might appreciate the promoted feature more if at least those funds went towards perhaps some sort of community stake-weighted vote on how best to use the funds (projects, charitable efforts, etc). And by "happenstance", that's sort of what it seems whaleshares is trying to achieve! :)
I'm just reading this now - I am new to all of this crypto stuff as well as to steemit. What does the term "burn money" even mean? Trying to learn and constantly lost here :)
as if you would destroy a dollar bill by burning it, you destroy crypto by sending it to an address (in this case @null) where it's basically lost forever, and cannot be used by anyone else.
That is a completely new aspect of this world to me. Thank you for the explanation but I'm not sure I get the analogy.
Are you saying that @null will never spend it and so it is lost? Why will @null never spend it, or by what mechanism does he/she/it destroy it? How would that be different from someone who is just holding steem money of the various kinds without spending it to boost their power or whatever?
I'm not sure I understand how the money is created in the first place and this is another side to it. I really appreciate your replying. Thank you.
because @null doesn't actually exist as a user, any money sent there is forever inaccessible to anyone! And that's also my point, it's no different than someone just holding STEEM, EXCEPT that they can eventually choose to spend it. Unless they lose their keys, of course, at which point it's also as good as "burned" (ie. completely inaccessible forever, or until quantum computers figure out how to crack it)!
Regarding money creation, think of the STEEM blockchain as a new sort of "blockchain government". And how do governments create money? They "print" it into existence, out of "thin air". That's basically what the STEEM blockchain does as well. However, it is done very precisely according to a specific algorithm agreed upon by the community and the witnesses they support.
All new STEEM and SBD go into the reward pool and are delegated according to the rules of the system. So, unlike say the Federal Reserve, each of us actually has a say in how that newly printed crypto money will be distributed to the stakeholders in the community! How great is that?! :)
Anything that diversifies me out of fiat is fabulous to hear! This is why I am on barter platforms as well. Thank you for that very good information and I am pasting into my long doc of info to understand.
What is the benefit side of the destruction for null or for anyone else?
Why would null not want to spend the money?
How to you get to be a non-existent user in the first place?
Are many users non-existent like null, or just is this one or one of a few?
Why would this system allow the destruction or is there no way to stop it and that is just a risk in this type of currency?
HAAHA Funny I BUMP into YOU here! Anyway, thanks for the explanation, so it is frowned upon by part of the community to use the upvote sellers it seems. I just realized how insanely easy it is to take advantage of and I was thinking of using vote selling to promote a guy on youtube to come to steemit with his 80,000 followers, if using vote bots helped me snag him and his 80k followers would that still be considered as a "net" negative to the community? I am essentially advertising that which is disliked by the author I think, but with the caveat that it potentially could strengthen the steemit user base hmmmmmmmm.
New steem is created every day and will be forever. Burning steem is just to put upword pressure on the price. When more is created, the value goes down, when more is burned, the value goes up. Of course, that is only the supply side of the equation. You have to factor in demand as well.
I like this !!!!!
I am celebrating 2002 followers and just gave 11000 SBD Back to @null and therefore to the community @edje
Just for a nice feeling to say thank you
WOW @RANDOWHALE EVEN HID MY REPLY BECAUSE IT IS TOO TRUE
REALY WORTH TO RESHOW IT AND THINK ABOUT WHY HE DID IT
HE PROBABLY DOWNVOTES THIS AS WELL!
All of randowhales SBD income goes to @randowhalefund and from there to @nextgencrypto and @cached to get then to bittrex an so on... this can all be seen in his wallets
and thats not even close to be a complete list
Would be cooler if they didn't misrepresent themselves as saying they make no profit when they very clearly make curation rewards while simultaneously condemning Whaleshares as "vote buying" when we only release the whaleshare tokens through contests and rewarding people who have benefited the community and the beyondbit token as a means of creating funding for various crypto projects by giving them tokens to upvote their posts and only make curation rewards too. Furthermore, since our tokens are only released to minnows participating in contests as a means of helping the community instead of whatever posts are being promoted which is clearly an effort to maximize those curation rewards I find the remarks about being not for profit incredibly deceptive.
personally, I kind of hate the fact that promoted posts "burn" money. enough crypto is burned off already just by people losing their keys and such, so why "accelerate" the process. perhaps this made more sense when the annual inflation rate of STEEM was 100% or so annually.
I think I might appreciate the promoted feature more if at least those funds went towards perhaps some sort of community stake-weighted vote on how best to use the funds (projects, charitable efforts, etc). And by "happenstance", that's sort of what it seems whaleshares is trying to achieve! :)
I'm just reading this now - I am new to all of this crypto stuff as well as to steemit. What does the term "burn money" even mean? Trying to learn and constantly lost here :)
as if you would destroy a dollar bill by burning it, you destroy crypto by sending it to an address (in this case @null) where it's basically lost forever, and cannot be used by anyone else.
That is a completely new aspect of this world to me. Thank you for the explanation but I'm not sure I get the analogy.
Are you saying that @null will never spend it and so it is lost? Why will @null never spend it, or by what mechanism does he/she/it destroy it? How would that be different from someone who is just holding steem money of the various kinds without spending it to boost their power or whatever?
I'm not sure I understand how the money is created in the first place and this is another side to it. I really appreciate your replying. Thank you.
because @null doesn't actually exist as a user, any money sent there is forever inaccessible to anyone! And that's also my point, it's no different than someone just holding STEEM, EXCEPT that they can eventually choose to spend it. Unless they lose their keys, of course, at which point it's also as good as "burned" (ie. completely inaccessible forever, or until quantum computers figure out how to crack it)!
Regarding money creation, think of the STEEM blockchain as a new sort of "blockchain government". And how do governments create money? They "print" it into existence, out of "thin air". That's basically what the STEEM blockchain does as well. However, it is done very precisely according to a specific algorithm agreed upon by the community and the witnesses they support.
All new STEEM and SBD go into the reward pool and are delegated according to the rules of the system. So, unlike say the Federal Reserve, each of us actually has a say in how that newly printed crypto money will be distributed to the stakeholders in the community! How great is that?! :)
Anything that diversifies me out of fiat is fabulous to hear! This is why I am on barter platforms as well. Thank you for that very good information and I am pasting into my long doc of info to understand.
What is the benefit side of the destruction for null or for anyone else?
Why would null not want to spend the money?
How to you get to be a non-existent user in the first place?
Are many users non-existent like null, or just is this one or one of a few?
Why would this system allow the destruction or is there no way to stop it and that is just a risk in this type of currency?
So many questions!
@null is having so much money at the moment that his wallet can't be even loaded :) :) :)
But i agree and i understand concept of @null, non-accessible account with wallet defined in config for steem blockchain.
HAAHA Funny I BUMP into YOU here! Anyway, thanks for the explanation, so it is frowned upon by part of the community to use the upvote sellers it seems. I just realized how insanely easy it is to take advantage of and I was thinking of using vote selling to promote a guy on youtube to come to steemit with his 80,000 followers, if using vote bots helped me snag him and his 80k followers would that still be considered as a "net" negative to the community? I am essentially advertising that which is disliked by the author I think, but with the caveat that it potentially could strengthen the steemit user base hmmmmmmmm.
And who is going to decide, where this money go ???
New steem is created every day and will be forever. Burning steem is just to put upword pressure on the price. When more is created, the value goes down, when more is burned, the value goes up. Of course, that is only the supply side of the equation. You have to factor in demand as well.
^this
Thanks very good post !!!!
Awesome Work!
Keep it up!!!
@cryptoinvestinfo
I like this !!!!!
I am celebrating 2002 followers and just gave 11000 SBD Back to @null and therefore to the community @edje
Just for a nice feeling to say thank you
You kind of missed the decimal point haha
it was 11 SBD :D
grüße aus Wien
Its great to see the vote bots diversifying and increasing competition in that space. A really interesting dynamic introduced by the last HF.
It will be interesting to see how this all pans out.
Wow very great project!
I think its a great way to help the rewards pool to recover and I kind of dont like the activity around @randowhale with his accounts @randowhalefund @berniesanders, @cached, @thecyclist, @yougotflagged, @danknugs, @nextgencrypto and @engagement because he is cashing out good.
Liked, commented and resteemed :)
Cry me a rivier.
WOW @RANDOWHALE EVEN HID MY REPLY BECAUSE IT IS TOO TRUE
this can all be seen in his wallets
REALY WORTH TO RESHOW IT AND THINK ABOUT WHY HE DID IT
HE PROBABLY DOWNVOTES THIS AS WELL!
All of randowhales SBD income goes to @randowhalefund and from there to @nextgencrypto and @cached to get then to bittrex an so on...
and thats not even close to be a complete list
WOW he ruined my reputation completely
I used to have a 34 REP and now I am down to 16!
Part of the problem, eh? Why is this? Because you didn't think of it first?
Also, just to note, your bot has had 0 effect on people using @randowhale. In fact, traffic has increased.
The fact that you call it an "exploit" is absolutely ridiculous and shows your blatant ignorance of how the platform works.
Again, you sound like you're just sore because you didn't come up with the idea and don't have the SP to support it. Your jealousy is not flattering.
^ Exactly
It's a great job..........