RE: I Am Sorry for My Last Post!
I had not even taken 10 seconds to Google "Steemit account creation service" because if I had I also would have seen the first search result which is https://anon.steem.network/.
And you then said this:
Had I even thought to look and found this, I would have simply made a post promoting the existing service as I have done with so many other posts in the past showing my favorite Steem services.
So, you're claiming to have not even known about @anonsteem? That's funny, because I can direct your attention to this post...from you.
Meet Steem's Top 10 Witnesses!
In this post, you wrote the following:
Someguy123 is a well-known developer (top 3% at Bitrated) of third-party applications for both Litecoin and Steem. His skills include python, javascript and PHP, as well as system administration.
He has been personally vouched for by Charlie Lee, also known as the creator of Litecoin. He’s developed a number of projects, including Lite Vault, Explorer, Steem Center, and the AnonSteem service which allows another vector for registering new users onto the Steemit platform.
Looks like you knew about this service since at least September 3rd.
It's one thing to "admit a mistake." It's another thing to pretend that you simply made a mistake when it actually appears that you're just trying to do damage control...by lying about what you did or did not know previously. So, which is it? Did you know about @anonsteem back on September 3rd when you wrote about it? Or did you just learn about it today?
Great question! @lexiconical did the research for each of the witnesses in these posts while I did the videos and made edits as is mentioned in each of the posts I have done with him. While @lexiconical did notice @anonsteem and included it in the post, it was one line in a large post which I browsed over and obviously would have benefited a lot from reading in more detail. With everything I knew about @someguy123 already, I had a list of topics I was prepared to discuss for the video based on what I already knew and paid no attention to anything else.
So, @lexiconical does your research for you and writes your posts?
Is it common for you to not pay attention to the information you're posting in your name to your many followers across social media? Is it common for you to make entrepreneurial decisions without researching the product/service you want to sell? Is it common for you to sell such products/services to unsuspecting followers or random people who aren't aware of the free/cheaper alternatives?
I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing that you simply didn't read your own post and knew nothing about @anonsteem prior to yesterday. Why didn't @lexiconical point that out to you?
And I especially don't believe that this was just an innocent "mistake" when you're already selling readily available information about how to become a witness for Steem...for $180.
Given what I know about your history here and on other platforms before joining Steemit, I don't think I can believe a single word that you say. It's a pattern of behavior that appears to be continuing uninterrupted. And quite frankly - it disgusts me that you can still profit from it so easily...which is why you'll keep doing it.
"So, @lexiconical does your research for you and writes your posts?"
I have only ever worked with Jerry on those three Witness posts. The deal was that I would research and compose the entire proofread article and he would handle the video, posting, and anything else. I assured him at each stage of the draft, from rough / rough 2 / etc / up to final and proofread. I guess he trusted me there.
Jerry did state this in each article, but honestly, I don't think too many people saw it.
"Is it common for you to not pay attention to the information you're posting in your name to your many followers across social media"
Jerry and I met once, briefly, at his Steemit meetup. I believe he took a bit of a leap of faith with me after I impressed him, as he did not feel the need to check all my work. Whether that is to any person's particular journalism standard is obviously up for debate, but I will engage in the conceit of ego here and say I don't think Jerry would have posted my work with such "unediting faith" had he not had a chance to vet me for crazy in person.
"Why didn't @lexiconical point that out to you?"
I was never asked before he posted this post. Jerry doesn't consult me for anything other than Witness posts so far.
We did not go over each witness post individually. I don't have Jerry's phone number or even email, or any way to contact him except Discord.
I submitted them in a living document containing all (42 so far) Witness reports. Jerry takes the next set when he has the time to make a video to go with them and posts it.
If you feel this did not sufficiently answer your question, please elaborate and I will try to do the same. I am happy to provide full transparency as much as I know.
Furthermore...
"Is it common for you to not pay attention to the information you're posting in your name to your many followers across social media?"
I would argue that this is the default state of most social media posters in existence. I think we would all agree on this point, although Jerry is not a typical social media user.
We (should) have different standards for witnesses or careers/businesses designed to make a profit.
However, I think this is worth noting as a not-impossible explanation.
for real, right
Just started digging into this situation with Jerry today and, without taking sides, can say that @ats-david is the only person making sense in this conversation. @jerrybanfield Dude...you tried. Let's move on.
Sir i need your upvote
you gotta be joking, right...?
A Priceless Tip For Steemit Newbies Seeking Followers & Upvotes... (The #1 Thing To Do And NOT Do)
I wrote an article a couple of weeks ago about some of the Steemit Etiquette I had learnt in the 3 months I've been here, in particular regarding the self upvoting, but yeah, there are ways to ask for upvotes, like in a good post. But I think the "Sir I need your upvote" might be a simple troll. To be ignored. Though good to note the person in case they begin to abuse and spam upvote requests.
I don't see anything wrong with someone ghost writing your content and then you acting as a presenter, I think people are being a little overzealous, there is no need to attack you on this level...
Whether you knew about AnonSteem or not seems beside the point. The very idea of charging someone new to the platform $50 for instant site creation is not helping them as much as it's helping you.
You could have helped her like I do when someone new asks for my help.
First, I create their account with AnonSteem and fund it myself. Then I show them how to make an intro post and teach them about Steemit etiquette. Then I make a post about them and how we know each other and direct my followers to their account. Once my post pays out I transfer the SBD to their new account so they get a good start. It actually cost me to help them, not the other way around. That's how you truly help someone.
You seem to try to monetize every interaction you have with other Steemians and it comes off as scammy. This post feels like you're just backtracking once the community reacted negatively to your idea of "helping people".
Helping people and trying to monetize a service are two different things. Monetizing a service benefits you as much, or more than it benefits them. Helping people without asking for compensation is really helping them.
"Someguy123 is a well-known developer (top 3% at Bitrated) of third-party applications for both Litecoin and Steem. His skills include python, javascript and PHP, as well as system administration."
"He has been personally vouched for by Charlie Lee, also known as the creator of Litecoin. He’s developed a number of projects, including Lite Vault, Explorer, Steem Center, and the AnonSteem service which allows another vector for registering new users onto the Steemit platform."
For the record, those are indeed my own unedited words. I am not sure if Jerry proofread my work. I promised him that I would do several proof-reading passes myself, so I cannot speak to that.
This was stated in the text of the post, where Jerry notes that the words are my own.
It one thing for him to know about anonsteem and it's another thing for him to know that our phone numbers are email are probably for sell.
Two days ago I found out that our phone numbers is the price we pay for creating a steemit account. T in the FAQ page
Does that make any sense. I have never in my entire surfing(www) life seen a site that does that. So now where is the decentralisation we talking bout.
Your phone numbers are absolutely not for sale and they never will be. In addition, there are many other ways to create a Steem account without providing your phone number one of which is mentioned in this very article: anonsteem. The reason your phone number is required is because everyone who joins steemit.com receives delegated steem power from Steemit and therefore the approval system requires additional information to guarantee that those requesting accounts are not attempting to defraud the system. Other social networks don't ask for phone numbers because they don't care about whether or not accounts are genuine. That just doesn't work for any application that is going to use Steem Power delegation to enable users to create Steem accounts for free.
Community Liaison, Steemit
Below is from the FAQ page.
Am I allowed to create more than one account?
Each user is allowed only one paid-for account created via Steemit.com, however users are allowed to create multiple accounts on the blockchain. Creating additional accounts on the blockchain requires users to pay their own account creation fee for any additional accounts.
What are other ways to create an account on the blockchain besides using Steemit.com?
If you are willing to pay your own signup fee, then there are other ways to create a new account on the blockchain.
There is a third-party tool called AnonSteem that accepts bitcoin, Litecoin, STEEM, or SBD to anonymously create a Steem account. You do not need to have an existing Steem blockchain account to use the service, but there is a charge on top of the blockchain account creation fee for using the service.
There is also a third-party tool called SteemConnect that allows you to create accounts by paying or delegating the account creation fee. There is no additional fee to use the service, but does require an existing Steem blockchain account to pay the account creation fee to create the account.
Why do I need to provide my email and phone number?
To create an account on the blockchain, it costs STEEM tokens. When you create an account through Steemit.com, Steemit Inc. is supplying the tokens to pay the account creation fee. In order to prevent users from abusing the paid-for signup and creating multiple accounts, we need to be able to verify that each user is only signing up for one account.
Who are they paying the account creation fee and there are other ways to verify accounts. selling our details is not the only problem, they can also give fed our details if the are pressurized.
@Andrarchy! Thanks for clearing that up - you just answered the question I was about to ask
Your videos are awesome, btw. Respect!
Hi @andrarchy, I think the efforts Steemit goes to to verify everyone is a real user are great.
(I always had my suspicions when we placed Facebook ads at work that half of facebook's ad traffic was their own fake users.) Having said that, because Steemit does require everyone's phone numbers to verify our accounts is there therefore ever going to be a plan to offer Steemit users who want to opt in the option of having Two Factor Verification?
I know a lot of people want to use Steemit anonymously and that shouldn't be changed for people who want to remain off the radar, but there are a lot of us who also would prefer the security of two factor verification.
Basically all my bank accounts, my facebook, my ISP etc. all offer it and it does help protect against identity and account theft. I was really concerned this week by what happened to @samstonehill. I know Steemit did him a solid and got back his account, but in his example he's a Steemian in his own name anyway, it is his face on his videos and he uses his real identity.
So for those Steemians who aren't so concerned about staying anonymous for whatever reason, wouldn't two factor verification be something that could be offered to help protect our accounts if we wanted to opt into it? It would be a re-assurance for people who want to use Steemit creatively as a blogging platform. A lot of us aren't crypto or security experts, so it would be heartbreaking to put a year or two into building up a Steemit profile and gain lots of followers only to then have some hacker basically steal all of that work and effort.
What is your idea for a second factor? Google Authenticator, SMS, Yubikey?
I think a choice of all of the above would be good. I like SMS verification myself.
Short resume`
@fishmon lol
Jerry Gets Caught
Oh boy...
@ats-david has a Very Valid Point!
I AM NOT a STEEMIT WITNESS, but I have witnessed A LOT STEEMIT VETERANS on the platform...
Keep STEEM N ON @ats-david
Frank
@ats-david What if he again makes a new post titled "I Am Sorry for My Last Post!", because of your comment above. I think Jerry has made 2 mistakes within 24 hours!
He will still get upvoted by the usual suspects.
We're dealing with mostly auto-voting across this platform as a whole right now. It's no surprise many are out of the loop (or don't care).
This is so true. It might be the biggest challenge if we want mass adoption for this platform.
Agreed.
If he makes a new post about this...maybe downvote it? And maybe stop supporting the people who consistently/continually support him, mostly via auto-votes?
I know this isn't the place to rant about this but seriously, I think auto-votes might be able to ruin the system. It's starting to feel like a ghost town in here.
99% of the daily reward pool is delivered by auto-votes from accounts that hold massive amounts of SP (or delegated SP), but how could they possibly read every Steem post to create a more 'fair'distribution based on content?
Steemit ate my last two replies so fuck being eloquent.
I don't care. If you can't read, you don't get to vote. If you don't have time to vote, Steem is a dumb investment for you and you should sell and power down.
Autovote is the antithesis of this platform. Fuck autovote.
u might be forced into it tho...
Maybe that's a bit too straight to the point. But I do understand where you're coming from. Having a bot do the voting directly goes against the concept of 'Proof of Brain', an actual human reflexion on quality and content.
From what I understand, Steem was built on 'Proof of Brain', since Proof of Stake and Proof of Work have serious disadvantages. So yes, I tend to agree that autovote is indeed the antithesis of this platform.
One solution for rewards based on content is those with high SP to hire others by delegating SP . The accounts that have introduceyourself posts with photos of the same person in various posts and original content (verified by cheetah and other hummans) are human and the others are all suspect.
Yep, He probably knew about AnonSteem before posting it!
hand got caught in the cookie jar...
lol
This post has received a 3.3 % upvote from @boomerang thanks to: @alexvan
@boomerang distributes 100% of the SBD and up to 80% of the Curation Rewards to STEEM POWER Delegators. If you want to bid for votes or want to delegate SP please read the @boomerang whitepaper.