I think that @sweetsssj's posts are not worth the $700 + each that they receive however in her defense she's only posts once every 2 days not 10+ times per day.
What would you think if 16 or 17 groups of people mimicked the @haejin/@ranchorelaxo system. Say these groups all did an exact replica of the current situation and all received 6% of the pool each.
Would you still defend the 16-17 accounts receiving nearly the entire reward pool each week?
Well, here's some basic economics: People react to a changing economic environment. As soon as they realize that they can't make the money anymore which they made before because the whales keep the cash to themselves, they will go elsewhere. This reduces the value of being on Steemit in total, which could go down significantly and causes those 16-17 accounts to lose a lot of the value for their self-voting. This again will trigger them to react by for example voting small fish or by creating profitable bots and prepping those up with some of their SP. Some users will notice this and increase their activities again until a new equilibrium has been reached and - Pardon - the next Socialist comes around the corner and tries to save the world again.
If you include all his previous posts in which he built up his reputation as a stellar analyst it actually is worth that much. Only the best can pull 3 sentences out of their sleeves and everyone listens to it. I'm glad I know someone like him who's cutting to the case in this manner. He reminds me of Martin Armstrong and his blog.
I did read your comment and I strongly disagree.
That's wrong I think. I'm sure there are blogs out there that are much more worth than that.
A question: What do you think about @sweetsssj regularly rewarding herself with bigtime upvotes beyond 100$?
I think that @sweetsssj's posts are not worth the $700 + each that they receive however in her defense she's only posts once every 2 days not 10+ times per day.
What would you think if 16 or 17 groups of people mimicked the @haejin/@ranchorelaxo system. Say these groups all did an exact replica of the current situation and all received 6% of the pool each.
Would you still defend the 16-17 accounts receiving nearly the entire reward pool each week?
Well, here's some basic economics: People react to a changing economic environment. As soon as they realize that they can't make the money anymore which they made before because the whales keep the cash to themselves, they will go elsewhere. This reduces the value of being on Steemit in total, which could go down significantly and causes those 16-17 accounts to lose a lot of the value for their self-voting. This again will trigger them to react by for example voting small fish or by creating profitable bots and prepping those up with some of their SP. Some users will notice this and increase their activities again until a new equilibrium has been reached and - Pardon - the next Socialist comes around the corner and tries to save the world again.
so this 3 sentence TA from haejin really is worth that ?
come on you should know better.
If you include all his previous posts in which he built up his reputation as a stellar analyst it actually is worth that much. Only the best can pull 3 sentences out of their sleeves and everyone listens to it. I'm glad I know someone like him who's cutting to the case in this manner. He reminds me of Martin Armstrong and his blog.
Steemit is still relatively young. Fluid, dynamic and aggravating - yes. I feel it will all sort itself out.