You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why I am negative to "WhaleShares" and believe it will be another "RewardPool-RAPE" for #STEEM.
You are welcome, please do your due diligence/research. Thanks for the comment
You are welcome, please do your due diligence/research. Thanks for the comment
I salute your post.
This is a complex subject and I'm not 100% for or against the project even though I have said of it that it's pure genius.
You might be right. It's difficult to foresee everything this project entails. I'm saying this honestly.
I think as with everything there are risks and benefit which people will have to evaluate.
Personally I don't think I would ever want to sell some of my votes because I wouldn't want my votes to appear on posts I don't support. I abhor the idea of seeing my name appear on a post that push ideals I oppose. I think this will be the case for most people. I also think this will become truer to everyone as Steem overall influence grows.
Also whales that sell their votes will have to evaluate the risk of losing some support if they engage in selling their votes, for the reasons mentioned above. If someone see a whale they know who's an anarchist beginning to vote on all sorts of posts that are anti-anarchist they will instantaneously understand this whale is selling their votes and might hesitate to support that Steemian in the future.
There's also the fact that bad authors who need to buy votes should in the long run become less influential compare to the authors who garner real consensus and so don't have to pay to create consensus or fake consensus.
I think what you are saying it this post is a bit a kind to saying: "Hey! We have incentive to live in the truth and not selling our vote to the highest bidder. Let's vote for what is most important or the truest to us. The best placed person to cast the best vote for us and thus everyone around us is ourselves, not the highest bidder in term of $." I tend to agree on that.
In the long run, Whaleshare or not, I tend to think most people will vote for themselves, for what is best for them.
I tried to clarify some of my stance on this project and I look forward to some more discussion on it.
Do you?
I try to.
We don't see most of the posts so we can only vote for the posts we see, obviously.
Most of the post or authors I vote for don't mention money and that's something I don't understand. If we are to be true, we need to acknowledge the place of money in our life and in our society and its impact. The very life of all people on Earth is subservient to money so rationally we should give this topic the place it deserves.
People are literally starving to death over the lack of it. We can't ignore those facts. People need to be talking about money creation and wealth concentration, these aren't just some subjects we should talk from time to time.
I don't see people addressing these subject the way they need to be. This is the case for a lot of subjects.
A lot of the posts and authors I support right now are people that support me back so that I can become a more influential Steemian. Being a more influential Steemian helps our posts to get more visibility. That being said I never hesitate to vote for someone who doesn't support me but whose post is the truest.
I agree with @teamsteem - we have a saying in India - 'Up there is God, and down here its Money'.
But @fyrstikken is making a valid point.
I believe that the reason people are starving around the world is that people with money have bought 'votes' and are now deciding what according to them is best.
They think that it doesn't matter what happens to all those people starving - they go about their lives and build more weapons and start wars to make sure that they always remain in power.
To remain in power these same people 'rig' the voting system and buy the votes and the whole circle starts all over again.
That is why you have 1% of the people owning 99% of the world's wealth.
If the votes are being sold and bought here on Steem - then it's the same scenario repeating itself.
In the real world, it's difficult to get rid of such politicians - I hope this is not the case on Steem.
Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and all other Social networks will eventually perish because of this very reason, they want to make money at other people's expense - as is happening with @mericanhomestead.
Steem may be the first one of it's kind - but remember Facebook came after MySpace.
I get you.
At the same time I think those who will pay for vote on Steem should make less profit in the long run than those who don't have to pay for vote but are creating genuine consensus.
Thank you for taking the time to comment.
Yes we have to identify such people by analyzing and we have to make some group who stand for the protection of steem. Our comment will be a symbol of a good post or so.. but its not a very good idea .. need some good suggestions.