RE: Steemit is NOT a Ponzi Scheme - It’s an Economic System just like the $USD
Sigh.
First note "One final thought on the Ponzi topic. Ponzi scheme have zero true liquidity." NO, they don't. They have negative liquidity. If they had (and could maintain) zero liquidity they would actually work.
far below your typical post quality. I forgive you though because you rank up there with my favorite posters.
I understand that steem isnt a ponzi scheme, but I hate posts like this because they do three things.
1.They bring up steem in the context of a ponzi scheme. Which naturally makes one think that steem might be a ponzi scheme. Imagine there was a front page post on steemit every day titled "Ollie: Definitely doesnt have sex with cats. Im totally sure." Even if the titular claim was logically backed up, its not like it would help you get a job cat sitting.
2.which brings me to 2.. they never actually back up their claims. Theyre always ned and dan are awesome and theyre going to change the world and make everyone rich!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! there are literally that many exclamation points, then an explanation of the steem system and how its so great.... The main problem with this is that when you say XXX isnt a ponzi scheme, then you totally fail to provide proof that it isnt a ponzi scheme, it makes it look like a ponzi scheme. which brings me to
3.Because of 1 and 2 , You sound exactly like every piece of literature ever written by a MLM marketer, amyway salesman or other ponzi schemer. THey all have 100 reasons why theyre not a ponzi scheme. None directly related to use of investor funds. Thats what they do, They briefly address objections, basically long enough to mount an unsupported denial, then divert the conversation back to how awesome their MLM program or whatever is.
Also, as a side note, if it were true, the lack of a "central authority" might be a valid argument against steem being a ponzi scheme. However, there absolutely is a central authority that can steal users money. I don't believe they will, but if they have the power to "recover" hacked accounts, that means that they have the power to take control of accounts without the private key.
Even if this enterprise required approval from all 19 main witnesses, the owners/founders probably have enough vests to put accounts in all 19 spots, should they chose to do so.... I guess they dilute their votes so others get a chance , but just between steemit ned and dan they probably have enough to take all the spots.
Now you can argue that theres a million different reasons why they wont... but they absolutely have the power.
The account recovery feature does not allow a trustee to take control of an account. The private owner key IS required. In the case of a hacked account, the FORMER owner key IS required.
That moment when you realize your Steem reputation is higher than Ned's. ;)
Fair enough, i stand corrected on the point. though all those requirements could be vitiated with a hard fork. Which you and dan probably have enough votes to get if you want to. And you can and did (IIUC) shut down those accounts' WD and transfer abilities while you were figuring out the hard fork to allow for account recovery.
The point being, its fairly clear that if the powers that be decided they didnt want someone to have their steem for some reason, they could stop it from happening. I powered up 4000 yesterday, which speaks to my belief that it isnt going to happen, but yeah it absolutely could. The system is definitely not trustless like BTC, it depends on the integrity of the central elements...
Just as a further side note, if you really want to refute the ponzi allegation, this is the question you have to answer, becasue nothing else is directly relevant.
What would be the effect of making it so that value can only flow outwards? If it still works then, then its not a ponzi. Because thats what a ponzi scheme is, an economic system that endures by using incoming value, intended as capital investment, as outgoing revenue stream to pay liabilities created by previous investments.
That means no exchange of fait for SBD or steem, no powering up, no new accounts, no buying SBD with steem.
If the streets only go one way (out) and it still works, then you don't have a ponzi scheme.
@sigmajin leave that with me to mull over :)
@sigmajin Great post. Appreciate the effort you've gone too. I hope to run into you more in the future.
actually wrote a post about it...
https://steemit.com/steem/@sigmajin/an-actual-relevant-analysis-of-steem-and-why-its-really-not-a-ponzi-scheme
though joels (linked below) is just as good, i wouldnt have bothered if i had seen it.