About a month ago someone noticed Ned's account started a power down.
In the last day I've seen a couple of posts talking about Ned's transfers.
It strikes me that Ned can't win.
One day people are mad that Ned has too much stake
Now some people are mad that Ned is powering down and making transfers with his stake.
We are talking about his own stake not SteemIt, Inc's. stake.
How is it anyone's business?
In publicly traded companies, the top five salaries have to be reported and stock sales are tracked.
Even there CEOs are not required to let anyone know WHY or what they do with it.
Yet, I thought most here didn't like that set up and regulations that go along with it.
The way I see it is his stake is his stake just like everyone else's and we have a choice invest in Steem or not based on how much you think he influences the price.
I just don't see how anyone feels the right to demand answers.
If something is happening in the community, everybody wonders why Ned doesn't fix it.
If Ned tries to get involved in something, a bunch of other people consider it interference or picking the winners.
If he communicates he is mocked, if he doesn't he is criticized.
Ned might be buying a boat, investing, wanting to frolic around the world with his Steem riches, he could be making a deal that is good for Steem, he might be buying a house, or having plastic surgery or hair transplants. Buying a race car or making a charity donation. He could be trying to slide money out and slip out the back door. He could be paying off the bad gambling debts of a drunk step-dad for the sake of his ill, codependent Mother. (totally fictional guessing) He might be funding Dan's Steem 2.o (That is my favorite story so far)
If he buys something cool I hope he shares some pictures.
I don't know how any of this is supposed to work in Crypto Companies, and it occured to me very few do. He is among a very small group of leaders who are each breaking ground in a new field.
I have mixed feelings about Ned, but it occured to me today, I would not want to wear his shoes.
In any case, because I see distribution (lack of distribution) as our biggest issue - I am not sad if Ned sells or gives away part of his stake. If he is breaking bad in some way, I hope it is fun and entertaining!
I was a bit offended on his behalf watching minnows with almost no stake make angry comments and demanding answers.
I think some of you are taking this co-ownership thing a bit too seriously.
In any case as a Steem public figure, people are going to talk, and not all of it is going to be good. I get it.
So, let's talk about it.
What are your thoughts and wild guesses?
Agreed entirely. Ned happens to be a public figure in the world of Steemit, so all he has to do is simply STAND THERE and the rotten tomatoes and simpering sycophants appear in spades.
"Blah, blah, blah, this and that is wrong with Steemit, and why doesn't @ned DO something and blah, blah, blah...."
Translation: "I was talked into creating a Steemit account to make money and it's turning out to be a LOT harder than I thought and I need someone to BLAME because I don't have a new Lambo yet, boo-hoo-hoo..."
I think a lot of people get their jollies simply from watching the activities of large stake holders and then complaining about their actions. Sure, Ned is a "principal" of Steemit. Such people get watched a lot... and usually get judged unfairly.
But Ned doesn't "owe" anyone — least of all a whiny minnow — anything. He's just as free to do with his stake as anyone else...
Holy fuck you're blind.. Open your damn eyes.
Ned is nothing but a used car salesman who has done NOTHING here but make empty promises. And you don't think he deserves to be a target? He's running whatever this is into the ground and obviously making some external plays because he's well aware of what he's not doing.
Bernie, I may well be fucking blind, and I also have no idea what it actually entails to run a gig like Steemit as a decentralized venue; since you run a witness, you know more about that than I.
What I observe is that everything here seems to take 10x longer to implement than anyone thinks it should. I have no idea who to "blame" for that. Ned? The dev team? Or is "working by consensus" simply more time consuming than a conventional structure?
You're no stranger to being a target. For every person thinking "Thank God for @berniesanders, he'll save Steemit!" there's another who thinks "That @berniesanders is an asshole who will DESTROY this platform!" You're a public figure with influence in this ecosystem; that makes you a target. Is that "fair?" Does it matter? Maybe not. But is it accurate to make you the target for a bunch of flying shit? Nope.
So what does Ned stand to gain from running Steemit into the ground? Or is he just a blind "Dan Fanboy" getting ready for Steemit 2.0? Those are sincere questions...
I do know software development and I assure you, what they have done over the past 2 years is laughable and those kids will have absolutely nothing to show on their resume for their time spent with STINC. Most of them probably aren't even trained developers, that's just a guess though.
Ned is at the top, he is the ONLY one to blame for lack of development.
I catch a lot of flying shit, it's just part of the gig.
I don't think he's doing it intentionally, I think he's just ignorant and inexperienced. Not his fault, but he absolutely is running Steemit and Steem into the ground. Is he a Dan "fanboy"? Highly doubtful given what I know.
Appreciate the response.
I guess for the time being, all we can do is pop popcorn and watch the show unfold. And hope others with significant skin the game can help mitigate the disasters...
This site borders on being a ponzi scheme, the only reason that isn't being determined to be true or not is because crypto's are not regulated. If this had been a company and What'sup cry for the upper tier a couple weeks ago to stick together and let the lower tier faulter she/he would have been sued into oblivion by the lower tier if they'd sunk and lost everything.
Sure, it certainly has elements that bring Ponzis to mind; but without an actual "product" and a "required buy-in" it's basically nothing. You're not under contract to anyone, and there are zero promises that you'll "get" anything... your "getting" is based on people's voluntary actions.
Sorry, spent many years researching and writing exposés on sketchy network marketing. Whereas the Steemit structure may be a bit dodgy, there's little here to pin a Ponzi on...
There are marketing plans out there that don't require a initial product buy in. Regardless of that debate what Steemit will surely be held to if it hits regulations is the ability of anyone to flag anybodies account down to zero. That's going to be a huge regulatory no no. That person earned that money and no one has a right to take it from them.
Agreed, that's one that's going to be tricky and sticky. Because you're not being offered MONEY, just a TOKEN. And just like getting paid in common stock by a public corporation, getting a token doesn't come with a promise that it has a specific value. So when someone flags someone else, they're not taking away money. At least that's how the sharkster lawyers will defend it.
WhatsUP might want to read the part where a exchange shut down or did not open and investors lost money....the investors said they did it deliberately to save their own investment but the company said there was something wrong with their program. Any "insider" mention where one group bans together at the detriment of the rest of the group or manipulation to stop the flow of currency to part of the group would be considered a violation.
Well I guess YOU missed the release by the SEC chairman on Cypto currency. Don't worry though for I did find it for you. Here's what he said:
Merely calling a token a "utility" token or structuring it to provide some utility does not prevent the token from being a security.[15] Tokens and offerings that incorporate features and marketing efforts that emphasize the potential for profits based on the entrepreneurial or managerial efforts of others continue to contain the hallmarks of a security under U.S. law. It is especially troubling when the promoters of these offerings emphasize the secondary market trading potential of these tokens, i.e., the ability to sell them on an exchange at a profit. In short, prospective purchasers are being sold on the potential for tokens to increase in value – with the ability to lock in those increases by reselling the tokens on a secondary market – or to otherwise profit from the tokens based on the efforts of others. These are key hallmarks of a security and a securities offering.
So a TOKEN is considered MONEY
He also said this:
As I have stated previously, these market participants should treat payments and other transactions made in cryptocurrency as if cash were being handed from one party to the other.
I also took this to mean you CANNOT just take someone else's investment out of THEIR wallet:
There should be no misunderstanding about the law. When investors are offered and sold securities – which to date ICOs have largely been –they are entitled to the benefits of state and federal securities laws and sellers and other market participants must follow these laws.
If you'd like to read the whole statement released please feel free to do so:
https://www.sec.gov/news/testimony/testimony-virtual-currencies-oversight-role-us-securities-and-exchange-commission
By the end of it you will fully understand that innovations have occurred throughout history....and they've all ended up coming under the same regulations that old innovations have and that the SEC does not tend to take likely violations and have already went to bat for some losses of crypto funds.
I think you are way off calling out the minnows, some of them have worked rather hard to get up there quite a bit. In doing such they've held their investment to their advantage, if things were going to fall through the floor at least they deserve adequate time to withdraw that to which they have worked very hard to accomplish thus far.
If I were "calling out minnows," I'd also be calling out myself, FWIW.
What I'm calling out are the pervasive voices of many who come here, post a couple of dozen times and then start to look for "someone to blame" when there's not $100's rolling in from their posts.
I'm calling out all the people who thought it was "a good idea" to go all over the place and tell people to "Come to Steemit!" while using Jeff Berwick's now infamous $30,000 post as a "fishing lure." That's as dumb/misleading as pointing at Bill Gates' billions as a good reason why you should work for Microsoft.
Is Ned up to some sketchy things? Who knows... Is he serving his own interests? Hells to the yeah. Is he going to act in a way to render his stake worth zero? Not unless he's clinically insane, I'm going to guess. Am I an apologist for Ned? Nope. I just remember back when I worked at Dell, Michael (Dell) got blamed for everything from a broken coffeemaker to faulty code...was that a "right" thing? Not really... but perhaps the basics of human nature.
....not to mention your comment about minnows reeks of arrogance.
No offense meant, and I wasn't calling you out; I was calling out "relative newcomers who are all butthurt because Steemit hasn't turned out to be a money-for-nothing cash grab."
I see your posts all over the place, so clearly you're not part of that group...
I've seen newcomers come here after I joined going gangbusters on here....nope most are not putting out quality content they are gaming the system. They've just found the loop holes and happen to be computer savvy. I think that's what frustrates a lot of the new comers who want to play somewhat by the rules. I didn't have any high hopes or ambitions when I got talked into coming here so it's a little hard to be frustrated with something
you weren't expecting anyway. My motto was if it sounded to good to be true
it probably was....and it turned out exactly that. Basically because the rules aren't spelled out like they should be, that's another regulatory no no they'll get hit with if crypto's get regulated. They'll have to explain to people exactly what one vote is worth, that if your votes don't add up to one whole cents they get dusted and any post that don't make ten cents gets burned. Like any business where money is transacted people have a right to know exactly how it operates.
Haha, so true. I really felt mad reading the comments.
I wouldn't want to be in his shoes either, given he hasn't achieved anything he's ever promised this community. #steemfact
I hope somebody powers me up so that I can get to my medical goals fast before it is too late. Just support our community, it is the best we can do than do rumors that will not resolve anything. Goodness gracious.
A lot of people expect more from him in terms of management at STINC, since they are getting nothing they take it out on whatever he does.
Agreed. I think in general Ned just has to do whatever Ned is going to do and hopefully we can all collectively drive this ship towards mass adoption and progress... or over the cliff... or into another lane and crash... or to the moon... :)
haha, I agree. :)
This excellent post was included in our new curation effort The Magnificent Seven -- a collaborative work by @enchantedspirit and @catweasel. You have received a 100% upvote from each of us to show our appreciation for your post. To see your creation showcased here ... and the fine company you keep ... please visit this link.
Magnificent SevenWe appreciate your support both for our work on this project and for the other creators of exceptional content who make it all possible. (Follow @catweasel to catch our future posts. @enchantedspirit says I'm really not as annoying as you might think, but she doesn't mean it.)
Do you like the show? I've never seen it.
I am pasting my response from bernie post here.....
@ned can do with his money what he wants...but he is the CEO of STINC in addition to being a token holder.
Needless to say CEO selling off his share of tokens is a signal , to say the least.
Words are words but actions have much more weight .Now I am not saying to hit the panic button and lose all confidence but there is a number where the % sell of by CEO signals low confidence in the project ,
are we there yet ? probably not
does @ned selling his token is very much same as other token holders? it is not.
Addition:
Are
People are unnecessarily harsh with @ned?
Quite a lot of times. ..
Also ..a little bit of communication from him can easily avoid any such sepculation..
Example :
Glad to annunce our partnership with xyz company for abc project and i welcome their @account on Steemit...
I agree with this as well. I do think they are trying harder.
yes, communication has improved but certain critical things still need to addressed.
I think it would benefit them, but I don't think they HAVE to address it. :)
True , they don't HAVE to do any of it , it's mostly best practice stuff...
If he issued a statement it'd imply he owes us explanations, and since words aren't actions a lot of people wouldn't believe him anyway.
what he does with his Steem is his business and shouldn't be seen as a bad thing.
As implied in this post, Poor guy is damned if he does or damned if he doesn't.Nice post - @ned has a huge share of Steem and he probably needs some throwing around money.
What we do know is he is committed, intelligent, delivered us Steem/Steemit that we love; and is hiring new staff.
If I had any critisim at all it would be if he could share more about the challenges he is facing, so we can all get behind him.
This was in regard of his statement (below) and me juxtaposing this statement against the cashing out event.
Haha, there is a lot of truth in that.
Steem remains a great proposition, regardless of the size of Ned's whale stake. This is not Litecoin, where Charlie Lee bailing out coincides with a realization that Litecoin itself is outgunned on all sides by multiple other coins that do the same thing.
I expect Ned just needs the cash. The things young men get up to with cash are myriad, and usually embarrassing.
But since you suggest he's breaking bad, maybe he's starting a meth lab. :)
++
??
I just hope he doesn't leave, or if he does leave he doesn't do it in a situation to leave us in a lurch. I think that's what people are worried about. I can't imagine anything good could happen from a change of ownership right now, and I've seen a few ships sink.
I honestly think I'd really love to hear him say something like. "Hey guys, I'm not going anywhere and everything is on the up-and-up.... there were just a few expenses that needed to be paid." I think it would make people feel a bit better.
He did make a very positive statement
this ^
Yeah but somebody on SteemSpeak said they "knew something". You know?
knew something..as in...what's the implication ?
I've heard the rumors, but I have been completely unable to obtain a reasonable source. I'm inclined to take it with a grain of salt.
rumors of @ned leaving ?
He wants to build a super villain lair with blackjack and prostitutes for the steem convention.
since it's a tech fest....
Leader always gets blames, no matter what he does! So, this is the nature! I will blame him if he can't bring SMT to the STEEM! Otherwise, no matter what he does! I only believe what he can do!@whatsup,
Cheers~
I think he is passing through a bad time well i will pray for him that all should be well soon.
I hope he's covering some of the costs of running this platform. There are bills to pay. But it's his business what he does
That could have been it also. :)
Well said it's his business what he is doing right now, but being a leader make you a public figure. People love to follow you and note your activities. If you are drawing heavily amount they feel some fear what's going on. I think a little clarification makes people satisfy. Let's hope for the best @steevc
Lol it’s true what you say his damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t in whatever he decides to do! The steemit community is very opinionated and protective naturally the environment encourages it so perhaps he knew that going in and it’s not something that reallt phases him! I know as a business owner feedback is important but not everyone’s feedback is! If you’ve invested large amounts of time and money into steemit by all means have at it if that helps you get over whatever he does in any sort of way! One thing I an appreciate is the transparency and people willing to speak out there are other environments where this is not possible so in a sense it has its place
Yeah, I know everyone is going to talk about it and I get why, I guess it was the direct punishing questions that made me a little defensive on his behalf.
It isn't about Ned power down, its the state of steem market, the low prices and low payouts are getting to folks, as soon as things rocket again whether it be Steem or SBD everyone switches topic and talk about something els... remember this is social media, its full of drama and speculation, not to mention, that @alpha account has been drawing quite a few attention
Like you, I have mixed feelings about Ned, but despite being a public figure he is a private individual. It's his and he can wash it as fast as he likes, dammit!
Trust me, I'm a doctor.
Best wishes to you.@whatsup I agree with you... I wouldn't want to be in his shoes. At the end of the day when you try to make everyone happy, you make nobody happy.
Maybe he needs money for launching Steem first SMT HF20 We should hope for the best. People concerns are exactly right. They follow the big guns, they feel scary if the leader is drawing money on continuous basis, it is a fact that no one wants to be a pessenger of sinking ship. so their concern is right. If @ned gives little explaination it will make good for this community. Any way hope for the best. This is my 2 cents opinion @whatsup
He could explain, but does he really have to. I fell like he SHOULD explain large transfers of Steem from the SteemIt inc account. (he doesn't) But he doesn't have to tell us what he does with his own stake.
His responsibility is to the company he runs which is different to his own stake in the asset. While he should be consistent in support the asset he holds, it is personal financial planning basics that one should diversify his assets to ensure financial independence. For top executives in many companies, this means not having too many shares in the company they work for. Why depend on a salary AND shares forever? If the company goes under or fails, you lose both the value of the assets and the salary! So it makes sense that he ia diversifying. My only concern is that he is doing it at an awful time which could lead to speculation of his faith in the potential of the project.
He mined his stake I guess, like the rest of them. The mining was before my time and I don't really care what happened. We have no information on salary or anything, maybe he is just pulling out some money to pay himself.
appearing to show a clear lack of confidence in the company business model). This is especially the case when the stock price goes down below it's value the previous year, as is the case of Steem, which has caused it to fall from the number 20 spot several months ago to 38 today, as I write this.Thanks for the heads-up, @whatsup. While I agree with you on the principle that what Ned does with his SP is his business, I also would note that it is widely viewed as a negative in any market when the CEO of a company sells off his shares (i.e.
One good thing about Steemit, at least in this case, is that we can all see in Ned's wallet that instead of cashing out directly, his wallet only shows a Transfer of 200,000.000 STEEM to @brixtongg 15 days ago, which I'm guessing is one of Ned's many controlled accounts. Then that account has been steadily cashing out via Binance and transferring some to @huobi-pro, another account of no posting activity other than cashing in and out to Bittrex, Poloniex and some other accounts I guess he controls too. He does have quite the array of accounts he's playing with.
They made it to be transparent this way, so it only seems logical that people will watch and ask questions, especially when @Ned does appear to be adding a lot of sell-off weight to the Steem price and thus anyone who is invested in Steem does have a right to question some, in my view, especially when the Steemit power down system is designed to limit how fast people can run for the doors, if they fear the worst. I did just see on @berniesanders post that Ned denied controlling that account. Personally, I believe if he believes in Steemit he would do well to be more transparent as to what and why he is selling off his stake in steem for. That goes part and parcel to being a CEO of a public company in my view.
I don't agree. I would if it was SteemIt, Inc's share. (Which he also doesn't explain, but should) He own stake is his own. Doesn't stop people from talking though, I get that.
Is he selling his Steemit Inc. shares too? I ask because you seem to imply that. If so, it might explain more and that could in my view actually be a plus. Still both his steem and his Steemit Inc. shares are both assets in the same business and in my book anytime the most significant holder of an asset sells a huge chunk of it shows his/her lack of confidence in the asset itself, which typically doesn't bode too well for the business.
I'm not quite sure I follow what it is you are dissagreeing with me on, as I just stated what is generally the way the markets view large sell offs by CEOs. I would agree with you if it were 5 or 10%, but we're talking a good 30% at this point with 354,351.591 STEEM liquid in his wallet ready to do whatever he wishes with at any given moment. No matter how we look at it, when a whale gets out of the tub too fast it causes the water level to drop significantly. It's my hope that he slows his sell off down to allow us plankton time to finish powering down before the price level drops further from the already 50% of what we bought in at.
No, he isn't selling steemit inc stake to my knowledge thank you for clarifying.
Thank you for clarifying that. I had hoped it may be true, as I've always felt 51% control of Steemit Inc. is too centralized of a "decentralized blockchain".
I like him for the most part, but I'm relatively new here and haven't really interacted with the guy. I don't see why he'd do something that would be purposefully malicious toward Steemit or STEEM, which is why I'm not concerned in the slightest about a power down. If he is just diversifying his assets to keep himself cleaner in the future, I think it's for the best. Now where the hell are my SMTs, is the real question!!!
I'd love to be Ned, though. I wanna be rich!
I think he is a good guy. The public side of a CEO is not his strong point. As long as the blockchain works...
Yeah, but that's what makes me like him a bit more, tbh. Not as smug and big-wiggy as some other people would be in that position.
It's his stake and he is free to do whatever he wants.. however things get awkward when we have big dump like this..
Good or bad, it's his money... He's free to do what he wants
I will admit that when I read Bernies post it made me a little nervous. Not because I feel I have any say in what Ned does with his stake (property), but due to the idea that maybe he knows something bad is coming and might be trying to unload before that happens.
My ignorance plays a large role in this. I know little about him, I don't know what would happen to the blockchain nor Steem if he walked away after cashing out a large portion (at some point the price would fall to ridiculous lows?). Would the chain continue? Would forks and other such things still happen? I don't know enough about crypto to understand how any of that works, or if it has ever happened before that those who create the chain just walk away after cashing out.
It's all above my understanding, beyond my control. He will do what he will do and no amount of worrying on my part will change any of that. I would question though why one would let a bird in the hand get away if that is what is taking place here.
Well there are many who are really unhappy with ned, shouldn't they be glad if he takes his stake and leaves. I am not saying that is what is happening.
Maybe a really low price would be great for distribution? I don't know what is happening either and I get having a moment of fear, I have them also. I don't get people who have been here two weeks, jumping on a post and demanding to know what Ned is doing and why.
What he is doing is transparent. He is powering down some of his stake and transferring it to another account that is sending it to an exchange. That is a fact. After that it is speculation.
I am guessing they do it because they feel if they mimic the tone of the post (be an ass kisser) that they will be rewarded monetarily with votes. It is a step up in ass kissing from the "great post, I upvote, please upvote back and follow" crap many do. But you are right, guessing Ned probably doesn't give a shit what someone with a few dollars to rub together is demanding as he jet sets around the world off the money he created for himself.
We are talking about his own stake not SteemIt, Inc's. stake!
I just want to believe that @ned I'd powering down just to have more money to fund some major upgrades in the platform , let just watch and see how things unfold in the next coming months
Nailed it on the head with this one. Damned if you do, damned if you don't
If STINC(Steem) really grows into a unicorn, what happens if Ned only holds a 1% share? Of course, Steem has not yet become a unicorn. This is what is to be discussed.
如果 Steem 真的成长为一只独角兽，Ned 只持有1% 的份额这事情又有何妨碍？当然，Steem 还没有成为一只独角兽，这就是要讨论的事儿。
I agree with you, I never understood all the angry comments or intrusive questions! It is his money, our accounts are all our own money whether it is $1 or a million, lol! I do love the theory you have that he is helping Dan, lol! Nice! :-) We never know!
well, for me, I simply see so much he could be doing to help the platform we all have invested so much of our valuable time to. He wrote something on another post about how he 'thought SMT'S were going to be big but we'll see'... when i can't differenciate my resteem's from my blog posts, I randomly can't post or transfer from my wallet... when i can no longer see past a certain date what my wallet transactions are... and further, when the fact that Steem is the easiest place to exchange and buy/sell/trade my crypto with no fees is a really big deal...
bah.
In my opinion Ned isn't working on SteemIt, he is working on the Steem Blockchain. They have been pretty clear about this!
Really clear since steemfest 2.0
If I were Ned I would certainly handle the community differently. I wasn't evaluating his performance, I was saying what he does with his money is no one else's business. That clear.
Disliking his performance is not the same thing as expecting him to tell you what he does with his money. :)
Cheers and good to see you.
Honestly: people shouldn't assume so much.
a lot.I know that @ned & the whole Steemit Inc. care about STEEM and its success
And that's enough for me to disperse any rumours.
Why sir thats did i donot understand.
It is good thing sir
@whatsup this step can also be taken for keeping it news and it gain popularity.
People will always talk. What baffles me is the shredding by newbies who should be more concerned with raising their own stakes. It's his damn shares, he can do whatever he likes with it
Instead of keeping that Steem locked in Steem Power and not using it, investing it in whatever he wants seems a better alternatice. After all, it's his Steem. There's no obligation for one to do that or the other with his/her Steem earned or bought, so, why worry about Ned's power down. If I would be in the case of the ones worrying I would ask myself what would Ned think if I was powering down?
'He could be paying off the bad gambling debts of a drunk step-dad for the sake of his ill, codependent Mother. (totally fictional guessing) '
ROFLOMG TOO GOOD
This post has received a 9.74 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @whatsup.
@whatsup you were flagged by a worthless gang of trolls, so, I gave you an upvote to counteract it! Enjoy!!
some people just loose mind when ned power down hahah
What happens is that there is an economic concept called Moral Hazard, and it means that if the CEO of the company does not have shares in it, then it will be more prone to take risks with the capital of the shareholders.
Ned said he's still working 100% on Steemit, so if that's true, there should be no problems. But it is natural for people to jump when they learn that Ned does this.
It is not only @ned but many other users have powered down. People need their money to trade, to shop etc... Everyone is free to do whatever he/she wants :D
To the question in your title, my Magic 8-Ball says:
Hi! I'm a bot, and this answer was posted automatically. Check this post out for more information.
His stake is his stake, period. If Steemit inc has its stake and he has his own, he can do whatever he wants with it. If he wants to invest in a new project he can.
Sir I am new user on Steemit
My reputation is just 30%
Sir I am best apvoter and comments sir please help me Thank you
Sir your post is very beautiful very interesting your all post I love your #post @whatsup https://steemit.com/photography/@asadpannu/sollar-system-esy-life