You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Announcing RobinHoodWhale, the Steemit Deep Sea Savior
I routed 55 SD from my personal account @repholder to @robinhood explicitly stating in the memo of these 2 transactions one with 5 and one with 50 that they are solely to test the promoted content feature, they are excluded from any eligibility in the investment part of RHW.
@akareyon: is that lengthy wall of self-justifications your way to express that you are sorry for jumping the gun and throwing accusations?
Yes~
Thank you for the transparency and for living up to the agreement thus far!
May this continue~*~
@repholder,
your name is etched into my memory of steemit - had you not promoted my steemigration post last month in slack, I would probably never had that much SBD to give away to begin with. I firmly believe that it is thanks to you it received that much attention within less than 20 minutes. I respect you and trust you; and I hope you also know me as a reasonable, but sometimes provocative user, and I was trying to make a point.
Imagine the potential for drama that I left untapped on purpose ...!
People will watch @null/wallet closely. Steemit inherently is highly competitive and thus, self-policing. Everyone will watch what his neighbor does. People will jump to conclusions. People will not double-check, like I did, by looking at the RHW wallet as well. I know your intentions were good. But you generated a source for misunderstanding, and it was my intention to clear it up by raising it before someone else does it - and does so with accusations, flipping of tables and curses against humanity.
At that point, you probably weren't aware you could promotify RHWs account from your own (that is what I did, I tried the function with a small amount of money for another user's post that I found worthy of attention), so you funnelled your own money through the RHW wallet. It was perfectly legitimate, given the circumstances: in this case.
What I am trying to get at is this: in the "real world", you can't send a donation to a charitable institution and appropriate it for a special purpose, like giving a million Euros to the Red Cross and tell them only to buy chocolate from it; it would be mightily frowned upon, and the Red Cross would either send the money back or buy medicine and blankets anyway. And there is a reason why one is not to use money from the company's cash register to buy private groceries, "I'll put the money back": to prevent misunderstandings.
I don't know how it is elsewhere, but in my country, this would have been called "money laundering". There are even laws to keep the bookcleaning clean of precisely such occurences.
tldr: Just trying to raise some "awareness" here.
I hope it also succeded at demonstrating that misunderstanding and drama can be avoided by formulating the criticism in a certain (non-accusatory) way, giving the "accused" a fair chance to put forward his own reasoning and evidence.
For the historical record, here is the evidence for @repholder's claim:
https://steemd.com/tx/f1c4f73929d933541bdafba6141c75e1cee05e1b
"you can't send a donation to a charitable institution and appropriate it for a special purpose,"
Yes you absolutely can. By law if you say it can only be used for X, that's all the non-profit can use it for.