RE: Community Service Announcement: You Control Steem. Vote for Witnesses.

[onceuponatime]

You say: "respectful, as always"

Well then,
why assume that your decision as to whether a full power vote is wise or not is superior to mine? How do you know what criteria I use when I vote? Why would you think that your criteria are more enlightened than mine? They may be .... but they might not be too.

In the absence of any effort at all on your part to reach a reasoned mutual agreement with me on the wisest course of action for the steemit platform - downvoting makes it appear that you lack respect for my decisions on how to vote my stake. It is a bullying use of power to negate my will. It thus appears to me that you are in violation of the Non Aggression Principle and your actions would be judged immoral by those who seek voluntary interactions between individuals .

Comments

[paolobeneforti]

absolutely agree. a lot of people here (young people, I hope) seems not to see that how things are done do matters a lot. It matters also when you look at a future built by winning bullies.

[abit]

Good point. If you know how it can be done better, please teach us. Or would you like to do it for us? Many thanks.

[paolobeneforti]

I should know what you are doing, in order to suggest other ways. If it is just a wargame, I don't think to have any hint for you to do it better. If the purpose is another one, I don't know which it is. (Well, I know what you and other gamers say about it, but words are just words, in the real world. Sorry.)

[abit]

[Nesting]

I should know what you are doing, in order to suggest other ways. If it is just a wargame, I don't think to have any hint for you to do it better. If the purpose is another one, I don't know which it is. (Well, I know what you and other gamers say about it, but words are just words, in the real world. Sorry.)

This doesn't help..

I've explained the purpose above, quoted below:

What we're doing, is in the hope of wider reward distribution, to satisfy more users, but less concentration on a few authors.

Reasons in this post: https://steemit.com/steem/@abit/definition-of-a-whale-and-a-whale-like-group-and-the-math-behind

Thanks.

//Edit:
More info:
https://steemit.com/steem/@timcliff/the-whale-voting-experiment-explained-including-downvotes-from-abit
https://steemit.com/experiment/@timcliff/the-whale-no-vote-experiment-whale-participation-data

[paolobeneforti]

thx for your reply. I already had read those post and their comment threads. Still can't see the purpose. (Btw, I often wander, in my time on Steemit, why people assumes as true that a larger distribution of voting power is surely a good thing, in order to have the platform growing up. And that implementing that larger distrubution of vp by means of legit violence and power has positive effects and negligible consequences.)

[abit]

[Nesting]

Still can't see the purpose.

The ultimate purpose: A hope of more adoption, then, a hope of higher value of this platform (also my holdings)

(Btw, I often wander, in my time on Steemit, why people assumes as true that a larger distribution of voting power is surely a good thing, in order to have the platform growing up.

I don't know either. So sometimes wanted to try something new.

And that implementing that larger distrubution of vp by means of legit violence and power has positive effects and negligible consequences.)

Agree.

[abit]

Fair.
You make your decision on how to vote your stake, I make my decision on mine.

[onceuponatime]

Your attitude is best summed up by your user name :-)

[abit]

Please be nice.