You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Does Anyone Know the Steem Power Voting Ratio; Steem Bought vs Voting Power?
Is your reply vote $132.09 US dollars or $132.09 Steem Dollars?
Is your reply vote $132.09 US dollars or $132.09 Steem Dollars?
It represents an amount of steem and steem dollars equal to a market value of 132$. (but the system values steem dollars at 1$ rather than the higher value they actually trade at,...)
This money does not come out of his account. In fact everyday, a pie of steem is made available for distribution amongst authors and curators. This pie has a certain value but it also means that each day the total amount of steem increases, thereyby diluting one's holdings. You will also see your total amount of steem price slowly creep upwards, by 0.001 SP at a time, this is to encourage holding steem as steempower (steem dilutes faster, since it doesn't get these 0.001 increments)
However, if the price of steem doen't drop this means that the total market value of steem increases.
I believe however that according to the current system there is about a 10% inflation in the system (including the increments, your amount of Steem Power expressed as a total of all Steem available is reduced by 10% a year (if you have no curation or author rewards).
Hope this clears some stuff up.
yes thank you....Steemit say they only increase STEEM circulation by 10% a year....but when you look at these numbers, it is difficult to confirm this...there is no real annual history chart of any coins on the coin desk which would increase transparency for everyone....
So a STEEM POWER guy can wipe out 30+ peoples votes with his one down vote which is a bad model....it creates mini dictators and certainly abuse and bullies....this is one large flaw in Steemit....it does not create "Equality".
If you were to read what steem is about, not simply consider that this model has been working for over a year now, with very little change to the functions it was based one, in complete transparency, under open source code, and promoting free speech, and a decentralized operating mode, you would understand why banning people is counter to this, why downvote only leads to abuse and why free speech is guaranteed regardless of price or steem power, and how telling people that they can't call you a cunt because you believe free speech means telling people what they can and can't respond with, doesn't make it free speech but exactly a sociopath control freak, which is also indicative of someone who resolves responding to those that he perceives as bullies with harassment, petty threats and literally to trying to impress the person he perceives as a bully with his "experience and media appearances" and LITERALLY not appear like a coward in the eyes of the person he perceives as a bully!
Also, even in this comment, but I think in all your comments you have not shown the capacity to finish a thought, or back up one thought with logic or reason, it all resolves either to you 30 years of experience or feelings, and this thread is indicative of this as well, it's exemplar not just here but in all your comments, in all your threads, you have not even one reason that doesn't rely on faith, supposition or both, reducing your logic to "i believe blah blah" or as other times in spite of new knowledge or good advice, all the while relying on .... ellipses which function exactly like the Draw your own conclusions fallacy.
The "Draw Your Own Conclusion" Fallacy (also the Non-argument Argument; Let the Facts Speak for Themselves): In this fallacy of logos an otherwise uninformed audience is presented with carefully selected and groomed, "shocking facts" and then prompted to immediately "draw their own conclusions." E.g., "Crime rates are more than twice as high among middle-class Patzinaks than among any other similar population group--draw your own conclusions." It is well known that those who are allowed to "come to their own conclusions" are generally much more strongly convinced than those who are given both evidence and conclusion up front. However, Dr. William Lorimer points out that "The only rational response to the non-argument is 'So what?' i.e. 'What do you think you've proved, and why/how do you think you've proved it?'" Related to this is the well-known "Leading the Witness" Fallacy, where a sham, sarcastic or biased question is asked solely in order to evoke a desired answer.
I would advise you reflect on what I have and what others have said to you, regardless of how valuable or not you consider it, you can at least consider if it could be true and come to a means to arbitrate instead of fling mud, all over the platform, spamming numerous threads with the same cunt bullshit behavior.
I am not a whale, nor is @bacchist, and your misconception of free speech applying only to decent reasonable responses that you decided what those stipulations are by yourself will not make you especially popular, and definetly not much of a thinker, in this community.
You also believe that "facebook will clone this", is probably because you see steem as Steemit Inc, and the ceo in control or responsible over the blockchain itself.
If you want to understand the inherent difference between Steem and Steemit Inc, and how that would mean the death of facebook, youtube and everything else INC, regardless is SteemIt Inc is the dominant voice among the witnesses, the development and everything else is transparent, so we have a very good idea of what the direction is, but that doesn't matter, because we have been bellow 8 cents not more than a few weeks ago, and we had always a growing and expanding userbase, and facebook cannot come close, nor any other platform, in diversity and quality of content that steem the blockchain holds, which is actually owned by the creator by simple fact of the immutability of the information, or it's resilience to being censored, and facebook and every other inc couldn't monetize something that promotes exactly what you are against or censorship and centralization resilience, meaning free speech and no admins while preserving the original creator as the owner, which gives the incentive to invest both time and effort into either consuming and curating for rewards, or creating consuming and curating for rewards, but also simply because you can speak your mind in spite of your definitions and calls for banning, bullying and ganging up on people, or your petty threats and weak, pathetic attempts at phishing my information in order to harass me with your cop buddies that you use to hide behind.