Why don't you elaborate on why you think that instead of being all aloof and mysterious? For goodness sake. I'm not your enemy. People that don't know what you know are not your enemy.
Why do you think that technical problems with Steemit isn't an issue? For those of us without the specific knowledge you possess, a bit of extrapolation would go a long way. @elfspice has many complaints, voiced loudly and passionately.
You simply disparage complaint as FUD, and absent specific detail regarding why those complaints are invalid, that argument is not compelling.
You simply disparage complaint as FUD, and absent specific detail regarding why those complaints are invalid, that argument is not compelling.
It's really weird, it almost reads like a concerted effort between @elfspice and @sneak and a few others who're held in high regard to make it clear for everybody to see that the issues @elfspice brings up are legitimate. Otherwise, you'd think they'd take the 10 to 15 minutes to refute his specific claims, seeing as a lack of confidence in Steemit by the community at large would cause their large SP holdings to severely decrease in value.
If there's truth in what @elfspice says and they don't have a solution, one very predictable way to handle it, considering their position, would be to deny it in the most non-committal way. The more you say in a lie, the more holes there are to sniff out. It's a lot easier and safer to plaster on a blanket "not the case" than it is to build up a labyrinth of lies to deal with the nuanced issues that were raised, trying all the while to make it appear congruent at the surface.
Sure, it may make you look guilty from the beginning, but at least there's a decent possibility that people will give you the benefit of the doubt as to why you refused to elaborate ("maybe he just doesn't have the time...", "maybe he's just anti-social...", etc.), and you've effectively given your debaters nothing to poke holes into. It's certainly not a win-win situation, but it's natural to conclude that it's better than the alternative.
Unfortunately, I completely agree with your comment.
I really like Steemit, and really don't want some of the alarming matters, that I have come to understand threaten it, to cause further problems, nor do I want them to continue to repress it's potential to blossom into all the marvelous flowerings of human intercourse it can.
Steemit can really evolve into something that can change the world for the better in many different ways. I'd lose some faith in humanity (again) if greed, power politics, and pride keep that from happening.
At least, until a platform does succeed, where Steemit does not.
Sadly, I have depleted my VP beyond reason. However, I retain the ability to follow, and now have followed you, in the hope of gaining further from your insights.
Given the lucidity with which you have commented here, I expect I'll have plenty of opportunities to throw votes your way =)
I disagree entirely.
Why don't you elaborate on why you think that instead of being all aloof and mysterious? For goodness sake. I'm not your enemy. People that don't know what you know are not your enemy.
Why do you think that technical problems with Steemit isn't an issue? For those of us without the specific knowledge you possess, a bit of extrapolation would go a long way. @elfspice has many complaints, voiced loudly and passionately.
You simply disparage complaint as FUD, and absent specific detail regarding why those complaints are invalid, that argument is not compelling.
It's really weird, it almost reads like a concerted effort between @elfspice and @sneak and a few others who're held in high regard to make it clear for everybody to see that the issues @elfspice brings up are legitimate. Otherwise, you'd think they'd take the 10 to 15 minutes to refute his specific claims, seeing as a lack of confidence in Steemit by the community at large would cause their large SP holdings to severely decrease in value.
If there's truth in what @elfspice says and they don't have a solution, one very predictable way to handle it, considering their position, would be to deny it in the most non-committal way. The more you say in a lie, the more holes there are to sniff out. It's a lot easier and safer to plaster on a blanket "not the case" than it is to build up a labyrinth of lies to deal with the nuanced issues that were raised, trying all the while to make it appear congruent at the surface.
Sure, it may make you look guilty from the beginning, but at least there's a decent possibility that people will give you the benefit of the doubt as to why you refused to elaborate ("maybe he just doesn't have the time...", "maybe he's just anti-social...", etc.), and you've effectively given your debaters nothing to poke holes into. It's certainly not a win-win situation, but it's natural to conclude that it's better than the alternative.
Unfortunately, I completely agree with your comment.
I really like Steemit, and really don't want some of the alarming matters, that I have come to understand threaten it, to cause further problems, nor do I want them to continue to repress it's potential to blossom into all the marvelous flowerings of human intercourse it can.
Steemit can really evolve into something that can change the world for the better in many different ways. I'd lose some faith in humanity (again) if greed, power politics, and pride keep that from happening.
At least, until a platform does succeed, where Steemit does not.
You and I are on the exact same page, friend.
Sadly, I have depleted my VP beyond reason. However, I retain the ability to follow, and now have followed you, in the hope of gaining further from your insights.
Given the lucidity with which you have commented here, I expect I'll have plenty of opportunities to throw votes your way =)
I thank you for the kind gesture.
You're now on my feed as well, for the same reasons.