We've all done it. Someone publishes a post, you leave a comment and, for whatever reason, it ends up being a comment-reply thread worthy of a thesis ... often having little or nothing to do with the subject of the original post. And, if an intelligent exchange ensues, you start thinking, "Hey, this would make a good post. I'll bet I could make ... $2.00."
This is just such an instance.
Recently, @crypto.piotr, a Steemian with whom I had only recently become acquainted, published a post, NEW YEAR, NEW RESOLUTIONS. DO THEY WORK?, I left a comment ... and it was off to the races - about the systemic problems of Steemit and, in particular, those associated with bidbots and other vote buying/selling mechanisms.
A few other users jumped in and we were soon engaged in a thoughtful, and civil, conversation regarding a subject that effects us all. @crypto.piotr, @turnerx, @carlgnash and @redpossum ... thanks for your intelligent discourse. I look forward to continuing the conversation in the comments section with anyone who has an insight to offer.
So, without further ado (and yes, that's how you spell it):
I have one resolution that I renew each year. My resolution is: get through the year without murdering anybody. 100% success rate … so far.
quillfire (56)
@eturnerx
Quoting eturnerx: My resolution is: get through the year without murdering anybody. 100% success rate … so far.
Congratulations ... but how much have you really challenged yourself? Have you, for example, ever met a STEEM Whale or Witness in person. Your constraint in such circumstance would be indeed worthy of praise. :-)
Quill
I've met worse. Why in particular the whales and witnesses though?
quillfire (56)
@eturnerx,
Venting.
85% of SP (limited upvoting capital) is owned by Whales & Orcas. Most of such SP is being delegated to bidbots and other game-rigging mechanisms in an effort to generate Passive Income (interest) instead of Curation Awards. This, of course, destroys the entire concept upon which Steemit is predicated ... that there will be a correlation between the production of Quality Content and Compensation.
And so, Steemit slowly dies.
The people who could change this, the Whales and Witnesses, are, of course, the very people who own the bidbots. Ironically, they are also the ones who have the most to lose ... but as long as someone else is doing it, so too will they.
And hence, they all sit around watching the price of STEEM spiral downward, in direct correlation with the number of declining active users. As STEEM is an inflationary currency (the Reward Pool increases the Monetary Supply, thereby decreasing the price of STEEM), an increasing user-base is the fundamental condition upon which all else depends (new users are required to sop up the newly issued currency to negate the inflationary effect).
What is the only thing that sets Steemit apart from the multitude of other competing social media platforms ... and hence, the magnet that attracts new users? Compensation for Content.
But such compensation is entirely dependent upon how the Whale/Orca SP (85% of the total) is deployed. Such massive SP diversion away from its intended purpose prevents authors (and professional curators) from earning anything substantial based up Quality Content creation/curation. Either cheat, work for next to nothing ... or leave.
This is not a winning formula.
And yet, instead of enacting the obvious remedy ... killing the vote-buying/selling mechanisms ... all we hear from Whales and Witnesses is stupid Anarchist ideological mantras: "No Rulers, No Rules;" "Decentralization;" "Everyone Gets To Vote Their Stake" ... as if mouthing such ideological pablum does anything to address the underlying problem.
STEEM/Steemit is a Killer App ... that is being killed off by the very people who have the most to gain from it living ... all in the service of short-term self-interest and 'ideological purity' ... Satoshi's Dream. Adoption of common sense "Rules of Conduct" ... to stop the flagrant cheating ... would be akin, it is argued, to communism, fascism and totalitarian control.
Quill
Hi @quillfire
Quoting quillfire: And so, Steemit slowly dies.
Steemit only dies in eyes of those who are interested in monetary rewards. It's still the best platform to build influence within crypto space out there. Plus communities here and high level of engagement are the reason why this platform will not die anytime soon. There is simply nothing better that could replace Steemit and push it into "shadows".
Quoting quillfire: What is the only thing that sets Steemit apart from the multitude of other competing social media platforms ... and hence, the magnet that attracts new users? Compensation for Content.
Absolutely not. Steemit allows me to target audience better than any platform out there. Mostly because I can scan STEEM blockchain and easily find content creators that are valuable for me. More and more people and businesses seem to slowly realize that this is the only platform (currently) out there which still enjoys good traffic and is allowing people to engage with each other. Those who are here because of "compensation" and rewards will never last very long.
Yours
Piotr
quillfire (56)
@crypto.piotr,
Quoting crypto.piotr: Steemit only dies in eyes of those who are interested in monetary rewards.
Monetary Rewards is the ONLY thing that differentiates Steemit from countless other social media platforms. Without compensation for content, Steemit has nothing unique to offer anyone.
Quoting crypto.piotr: It's still the best platform to build influence within crypto space out there.
The overwhelming majority of current Steemit users, to say nothing of potential ones, are not crypto-enthusiasts and could care less about "building influence within the crypto space." I know I certainly don't. An oft-heard assertion is that there is a revolution afoot ... a seething mass of people who care about "Satoshi's Dream" of creating an alternative to "world governmental control."
This is delusional. The crypto zealots are projecting.
What people care about is using technology as a tool to facilitate human-to-human interactions, and in Steemit's case, monetizing the content that they create and curate. Sorry, it's nothing more. Indeed, I would be extremely uncomfortable with allowing the Anarchists to do away with the laws ... there is a reason why the word "anarchy" is synonymous with "chaos" and why Anarchism, as a political philosophy, has never once been implemented in all of human history ... it doesn't work.
Important to note is that "Coming for the Money" and "Staying For the People" are NOT mutually exclusive goals ... users do, and will, want both.
By analogy, consider one's choice of employment. Yes, people want to work at something they find interesting and fulfilling. But they also want to make enough money to be able to pay the mortgage and buy groceries. The two desires do not negate one another ... and if people don't get both, they will eventually change jobs so that they do.
Quoting crypto.piotr: Plus communities here and high level of engagement are the reason why this platform will not die anytime soon.
User engagement has plummeted in direct correlation with the decrease in STEEM price, and hence, content compensation. Any network requires a "critical mass" to survive. What is Steemit's "critical mass?" I don't know but as more and more people become less and less involved, we're getting closer and closer to collapse.
Quoting crypto.piotr: There is simply nothing better that could replace Steemit and push it into "shadows."
Not yet ... but there are dozens of blockchains working in that direction and countless Steemians have opened up accounts. It is only a matter of time until one adopts (and enforces) the Central Premise that: Content Shall Be Compensated Commensurate With Its Quality." When it does, we shall see where the loyalties of Steemians lie. Go play a fair game ... or stay and be cheated by ever manner of game-rigging one could imagine.
Quoting crypto.piotr: Steemit allows me to target audience better than any platform out there. Mostly because I can scan STEEM blockchain and easily find content creators that are valuable for me.
I'm not sure what your objectives are but would argue that they are not reflective of the overwhelming majority of Steemians. I love the interaction I have with the friends and followers I've made on the blockchain. But I invest a huge amount of time and effort creating excellent quality content and will not continue to tolerate my compensation being reduced to almost nothing so as to facilitate the Raping of the Reward Pool by game-riggers.
If reforms are not enacted, as soon as a viable alternative exists, I will leave. And, based upon countless conversations I've had with others on the subject, I will not be alone. Indeed, I could easily name 100 other users who will move en masse to Steemit's successor so as to preserve our existing relationships.
Quoting crypto.piotr: More and more people and businesses seem to slowly realize that this is the only platform (currently) out there which still enjoys good traffic and is allowing people to engage with each other.
As mentioned earlier, the traffic has, and is, plummeting with the price. There is a direct one-for-one correlation and when STEEM dropped below $1.00, even the "50,000 stalwarts" started pulling back in great numbers. This is objective reality. Pretending it doesn't exist will not falsify its validity.
Quoting crypto.piotr: Those who are here because of "compensation" and rewards will never last very long.
They'll simply go elsewhere ... and Steemit won't last very long.
STEEM/Steemit is a brilliant idea ... in theory. In reality, it is authoring its own demise. The Whales and Witnesses and Dev's ... they all want to make money, don't they? They don't think it's reasonable that they should have to work for nothing, do they? So why should they expect that I, and others like me, should work for nothing?
The reforms required to rectify the situation are neither hard to articulate nor implement: We have to stop the cheating. There WILL ALWAYS be a hierarchy in compensation. Some people will earn more than others.
The choice we have is what that hierarchy is predicated upon: Merit or manipulation.
I choose merit.
Quill
Dear @quillfire
Quoting quillfire: Monetary Rewards is the ONLY thing that differentiates Steemit from countless other social media platforms
I don't see it this way. For someone with few years experience in social media advertising Steemit allows to monitor traffic and activity of users easily. And that's a game changer.
Quoting quillfire: Without compensation for content, Steemit has nothing unique to offer anyone.
User engagement has plummeted in direct correlation with the decrease in STEEM price,
Majority of those who were here because of direct financial rewards left long time already. This is one of the best places to build connections with others. Connections that will allow many of us to create business opportunities. Anyway that's at least how I see it. I may be naive :)
Quoting quillfire: If reforms are not enacted, as soon as a viable alternative exists, I will leave.
That would be sad to lose you :(
quillfire (56)
@crypto.piotr,
"Network Effects" require networks. At present, Steemit has barely 10,000 active posters ... and that's split up between multiple languages. That will not be large enough for the blockchain to survive. At some point, if the price of STEEM does not increase, Witnesses will have to start closing down nodes because their expenses exceed their income. Many are already operating at a loss.
How long can this continue?
STEEM is an inflationary currency which means that we need substantial user growth just to offset the price-diminishing effects of increasing the Money Supply.
Thinking like a soldier ... we will lose this battle if we don't do something differently.
Thinking like an ad-man: If you can't say it in a sentence, it's too complicated. What could you say about Steemit at the moment that would draw the millions of new users we'll need?
The crypto-winter has actually bought us a bit of time as the launch of competing blockchains were delayed (I'm thinking primarily of Narrative). But (the last time I checked) they're scheduled to launch in March. How many Steemians already have accounts? I do and I know of scores of others who do as well.
There will be little or no dissolution of the 'Steemit community' ... the community will simply move en masse somewhere else ... and the Whales and Orcas, owning 85% of something worth nothing, will become Minnows.
There are simple ways to fix what is broken. All of them involve stopping the illicit vote manipulation schemes. If people are unwilling to do this, then they will get what they deserve.
Quill
Thank you for that amazing comment @quillfire
Quoting quillfire: I'm thinking primarily of Narrative
I never heard about this project. Thank you for pointing me in right direction. Do you have an account on this platform already?
Yours,
Piotr
quillfire (56)
@crypto.piotr,
Quoting crypto.piotr: Do you have an account on this platform [Narrative] already?
Yes ... as does almost everyone I regularly interact with. There are a lot of people on Steemit who are actually serious about wanting to create great content. But creating great content isn't easy. It is laborious and very time-consuming. The 20+ hours I spend creating a single post is 20+ hours I can't spend earning money elsewhere. This is not a trivial consideration.
To do that consistently would mean making Steemit a full-time occupation ... which means having to generate a full-time income. If Steemit, or any other social media platform, is to survive, it must be capable of consistently generating content that stops people in their tracks. Average, or even Good, quality posts WILL NOT be enough to yield Internet virality, and hence, attract new users and mass adoption.
I'm sure you're familiar with the Pareto Principle: With respect to business, the square root of the number of participants creates 50% of the results. Applied to Steemit (in a fair and non-manipulated marketplace), out of 50,000 active users we would expect to see 224 generating half the post-payouts, new user growth, etc. We might call these people Steemit SuperStars.
But where are these Steemit SuperStars? In more than three years, the blockchain has never created even one.
Why not?
It's not for lack of talent. It's for lack of a fair and functional curation process.
Practical Ramifications
For years, the members of the Intellectual Dark Web have been making $50,000+ PER MONTH on Patreon. Their fans voluntarily contribute their own money (in the form of subscriptions and donations) so as to be able to INTERACT with these individuals. Yes, they (Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Sam Harris, Dave Rubin, Eric Weinstein, etc., etc.) post on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook (for exposure) ... but they don't interact with users on those platforms.
For interaction, you have to join Patreon ... and pay. And massive numbers of people do. And, while there, they also buy books (Jordan Peterson ... 2,000,000+), t-shirts and coffee mugs. And then, they pay to see them debate one another in person in stadiums all across the Western World.
On Jan. 15, in reaction to Patreon's banning of Sargon of Akkad (blatant left-wing censorship), Dave Rubin, Jordan Peterson and others of the IDW closed their Patreon accounts. Sam Harris beat them all by a couple of weeks. They are all desperately searching for a new home. They have openly talked about cryptocurrencies.
Theoretically, Steemit is the PERFECT solution. And, their opening accounts would trigger a tsunami of new users. We have everything they need: A forum for text-based articles (to replace Facebook and Twitter); a video platform (to replace YouTube); a governmental- and corporate-censorship-free environment (and, if my anti-abusive downvoting reforms were enacted, a user-censorship-free environment as well).
https://steemit.com/steemit/@quillfire/central-premise-and-proposals-a-series-about-fixing-steemit-part-4
And its Follow-Up:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@quillfire/follow-up-central-premise-and-proposals-a-series-about-fixing-steemit-part-4
But theory is not the same as reality. In reality, Steemit's compensation structure is so massively skewed by vote buying/selling (and other shenanigans) that it becomes impossible to craft a strategic plan. Yes, we have data galore but none of the metrics mean anything. Who is the Best Quality Blogger on Steemit? Subjective, you say? Fine, who are amongst the Top 10 Best Quality Bloggers? Surely you could approximate.
Who was the Best General in history? We could argue about that for a month and not come to a resolution. But we could easily agree that, whoever it was, it was one of: Alexander the Great, Hannibal, Caesar or Napoleon.
The "quality is subjective" argument is a Red Herring that is a smokescreen for not enacting common sense reforms that would focus compensation on posts that 99% would agree are extraordinary (even if they might not agree on precise rank order ... but why would such an abstraction matter anyway? You prefer the Beatles, I prefer Elvis ... how is that going to change anything. We both agree that both were great. That's all that matters.).
If you're a journalist or a Fortune 500 advertiser or an institutional investor, being able to identify "The Blockchain's Best Content," as determined by a credible curation process, is incredibly important ... and yet, at present, such a determination is impossible to make.
TRENDING means nothing (placement is purchased). Reputation Score means nothing (go look at who has the highest Rep Score on the blockchain) and Follower counts mean nothing (it's the size of your wallet or the result of SPAM-based Follow-for-Follow schemes).
And so, the IDW is instead trying to throw together an independent payment alternative to Patreon, one on which they can't be censored by Far Left activists (Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Apple, etc.). This is a lot of hassle and, collectively, it's costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars PER MONTH in lost income.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
You can't run your organization like Al Capone and still expect to attract legitimate business partners.
BTW, I read the link you sent to my wallet. Interesting ... I'd like to learn more. You've got my email, right? I'd like to brainstorm a few ideas if you've got the time.
Quill
Different Comment-Reply Thread
@quillfire You might be interested in projects like @steembasicincome, curation efforts like @curie and the various communities that often include curation and mutual support as part of them.
I've written before that there is no objective measures of quality that a blockchain can enforce. That leaves judgement of quality to somebody's audience. A mutual co-audience is roughly what I'd call a community. It's the communities that need to gain in power.
To that end, I support community builders via sponsorship to @msp-makeaminnow and I also am working on @we-are (see @we-are-one for the blog) to help communities get technical tools and access to SP. @we-are is in closed trial and currently supports around 1500 members.
That's mostly what I'm involved in. Can't say I'm innocent on the bidbot front myself - I do need to make an income until I can build my audience enough to earn from posting alone. So, I can somewhat sympathise with people who go that way. But, a big chunk of my steem networth is in community building because community is everything.
I might need some help too.
quillfire (56)
@eturnerx,
I am HUGELY supportive of any and all curation projects ... especially those that involve manual curation (or direct support of manual curation). Indeed, I have argued on countless occasions that High Quality Curators are EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANT to the future of Steemit as are High Quality Content Creators.
But this brings up a HUGE problem. Curation is supposed to be a process of re-enforcing feedback loops ... all of which are crippled on Steemit.
I have won numerous Curies. What happens is that Curie upvotes a post, which triggers an auto-upvote by @hendrickdegrote (a Whale ... and God Bless his soul) which then triggers a couple of Orca auto-upvotes and a couple of hundred Minnow auto-upvotes (most of which are worth less than a penny). At present, you're lucky if this adds up to USD $20. And then ... the process STOPS dead in its tracks. The entire "curation process" is over in a matter of minutes.
Theoretically, Curie's initial manual upvote is supposed to trigger a cascade. Curie and hedrickdegrote bump the post into HOT where many other users see and upvote it. This bumps it into TRENDING where the dynamic repeats itself. The net result is that really high quality content races to the top and gets wide exposure and generous compensation.
And then ... such TRENDING posts (the Best of Steemit) are supposed to start getting shared on other social media platforms and across the Internet more broadly. And this would be MASSIVE free advertising for Steemit which would become known for being a hotbed of GREAT CONTENT.
This would attract new users, especially those capable of creating high quality content and desirous of being compensated for it. These new users would more than offset the price-deflationary effects of an inflationary currency (payouts from the Reward Pool increase the Monetary Supply). And hence, the price of STEEM would increase as demand for the currency rises.
Increasing price of any financial asset draws the attention of investors and financial actors. A higher priced STEEM, driven by the SuperStars, augments the payouts for everyone lower down in the hierarchy. The merit-based higher payouts to SuperStars also provides motivation, and a template, to those desirous of climbing the ladder.
A virtuous cycle.
As discussed earlier, however, the theory is not the reality ... the entire system short-circuits after the first stage of curation. Either a Curie upvote doesn't result in a post's getting into HOT (there isn't enough SP in Curie's Curation trail) or, if it does, nothing then happens because almost no one with substantial upvoting power is interested in curating. (Whales and Orcas control 85% of SP).
Why not?
Because they're instead seeking to generate Passive Income (interest) by delegating to bidbots and other game-rigging mechanisms.
85% of the limited upvoting capital, that is supposed to be used for quality content curation, is instead used for upvote manipulation of one kind or another. Of course, the problem is further magnified by the fact that everyone now knows that there's no correlation between quality and the HOT and TRENDING pages. Personally, I haven't looked at either in at least 9 months. And so, even Minnow and Dolphin SP is not being used to re-enforce Curie's initial curation.
Worst of all, when a prospective user or investor shows up on Steemit to investigate the blockchain, they inevitably click on HOT and TRENDING, expecting to see extraordinary content. Instead, they see utter garbage.
I run an advertising agency ... you only get One Chance to make a FIRST IMPRESSION. Given that their First Impression will be negative, it will be all-but-impossible to get them to return at a later date for a second look. How many people's opinions have already been so poisoned?
Cheating is a shitty strategy.
Corrupted systems ALWAYS fail because all the feedback loops become negative. Venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves in the world ... and yet, because of a thoroughly corrupt political and economic system, its citizens are reduced to refugees and beggars. I will list another 100 such examples ... if you can list even one example of a corrupted system that has not collapsed.
Quoting eturnerx: I've written before that there is no objective measures of quality that a blockchain can enforce.
That's true. So what?
Who was better, Elvis or the Beatles? You will never get everyone to agree on one or the other. So what? Both were great and either appearing in TRENDING will universally impress. My vocal renderings appearing in TRENDING, however, would not ... and my having been the highest bidder wouldn't diminish the cringing to the crooning.
I'm not arguing for the concoction of some airy-fairy quality metric ... I'm arguing for ensuring a fair and honest curation process (based upon the collective opinion of the audience), unadulterated by massive vote buying/selling. We don't need a 'perfect system,' we simply need a system that isn't self-evidently disastrous.
Quoting eturnerx: Can't say I'm innocent on the bidbot front myself - I do need to make an income until I can build my audience enough to earn from posting alone.
As I've written on multiple occasions, I do not blame people for running/using bidbots as I consider it an adaptation to the realities of one's environment ... an environment where there is NO LAW ... and therefore is LAWLESS.
Nevertheless, such usage is destroying the very thing you seek to preserve. You're simply choosing a month's worth of arsenic instead of biting down on a cyanide pill. The results, though, will be the same.
I wrote a Series of Articles about reforming STEEM/Steemit. The following link is to a post that, by Day 2, became the 7th Most Commented Upon Post on the blockchain ... that is, it started a war. I would highly recommend you read it (and the comments) ... as it is extremely enlightening regarding people's respective motivations.
It also details PRECISELY (make sure to read the Follow-Up Article) how to implement what I'm suggesting. The idea that, technically, we can't ban bidbots is bullshit and, ironically, if we banned bidbots, quality content creators wouldn't need them.
https://steemit.com/steemit/@quillfire/central-premise-and-proposals-a-series-about-fixing-steemit-part-4
And it's Follow-Up:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@quillfire/follow-up-central-premise-and-proposals-a-series-about-fixing-steemit-part-4
Quill
@quillfire - that is quite a dissertation there, and very well said. As a general rule, I have a low opinion of those who work in advertising, but you are obviously an exception. I am genuinely impressed with what you have written here. You make excellent points about how Steemit really works, versus how it is supposed to work. It's become very gamey, and many of those who should be uplifting and supporting the system have instead become scavengers.
I loathe and despise all bots, and would be delighted to see every last one of them banned from Steemit. I realise this is not a popular opinion, but it's how I feel. Steemit is supposed to be about quality content, but there is not really much of that to be found on this platform. Mostly its people gaming the system.
Now, that being said, there are certain conspicuous exceptions such as @world-travel-pro who genuinely creates content worth reading, every damn time. The guy knocks himself out posting articles and videos of real craftsmanship. But he doesn't look to be getting more than modest rewards for his effort, because he's not gaming the system, and he's not playing the popularity contest aspect of the system.
And that brings us to the ugliest aspect of the situation. All social media is a popularity contest to some extent, because we are social animals. Sycophancy is part of social intercourse, however distasteful we may find it. But it makes me ill to see the extent to which being a tuchis-lekker can pay rewards on Steemit.
quillfire (56)
Quoting redpossum: I realise this is not a popular opinion, but it's how I feel.
Mate, it is a far more POPULAR opinion than you may realize. The overwhelming majority of Steemians have never used a bidbot and they're not stupid ... they can see the ridiculousness of the Hot & TRENDING pages as well as you and I.
But most people refrain from voicing their opinions publicly for fear of alienating fat wallets. But you should see the DM's I get.
There is also widespread resignation that there's nothing they can do ... the Top 20 Witnesses are wholly determined by Whale stake-weighted votes ... and the Whales own and delegate to the bidbots. To be honest, I find the whole situation so surreal that I struggle to articulate arguments ... it's like trying to convince someone that 2 + 2 = 4 ... how is it that they're not already convinced of the fact?
The Whales own boatloads of the very currency that they're driving into the ground. In an attempt to earn $100K in annual interest, they're forcing their $1 million Principal holdings to zero. Such myopic short-term thinking has blatantly obvious disastrous mid- and long-term consequences ... for themselves.
One might argue that they're gambling, milking the cow for all its worth before jumping ship at the last minute. But SP takes 13 weeks to liquidate ... and their liquidation would likely trigger a bank-run, hence wiping out the remaining 12/13 of their Principal. One would think that, at some point, their self-preservation instincts would kick in.
STEEM is at $0.38 and the number of active users has plummeted. At what point ought one re-consider one's assumptions and strategy?
Quoting redpossum: All social media is a popularity contest to some extent, because we are social animals. Sycophancy is part of social intercourse, however distasteful we may find it.
You're right, social media is 'social' ... and I have no problem with that. Human beings bind to one another, forming friendships and mutual loyalties. While that creates distortions in upvoting bias, it also creates HUGE benefits for the blockchain as a whole.
Think of professional baseball. NY Yankee fans 'hate' the Boston Red Socks and vice versa. But such 'rivalry' is what drives the popularity of the sport as a whole. Human beings are tribal by nature but the competition it creates is often very constructive (so long as people don't get stupid about it which, generally, they don't).
When the Twin Towers were hit on 9/11, no one had to ask for volunteers amongst Boston firefighters (Red Socks fans or not). Similarly, when the Boston Marathon bombing struck, New York first responders scrambled to assist.
Was there a single objection from baseball fans of either city?
The Band of Brothers phenomenon experienced by soldiers is the result of shared adversity and shared fate. Yes, the Army makes fun of the Navy, and vice versa, and both make fun of the Air Force ... but when you're under an artillery barrage, are you ever awed to see a fighter jet hurtling itself into a gauntlet of steel to save your ass.
I largely sign into Steemit everyday to interact, and help, my friends ... it's not like I'm getting rich. If I were not so closely bonded to these people, I would have stopped participating a long time ago. These bonds, while limited to a relatively small group, are the 'ties that bind' ... and not just my cohort but the whole blockchain because individuals in my group are also part of others.
Thousands of groups with similar sentiments are like a thousand overlapping circles in a Venn Diagram, cumulatively creating a system-wide fabric of cohesion that's binds the blockchain as a whole.
What is imperative, however, is that everyone in each of those groups be subjected to the same general set of rules. Everyone has to feel that there is, largely, a level playing field where no one has an unfair advantage.
A meritocracy is the ONLY kind of system that is sustainable as it is the only kind of system that commands respect for those who have excelled. If you're not making as much money as me writing poetry, improve. If you don't know how ... contact me. The generosity of spirit that I've witnessed on Steemit is simply amazing ... "those who can" helping "those who can't" for seemingly no reason except the desire to be a decent human being.
It's why I spend so much time typing up these damned comments and replies despite knowing that they will almost certainly be ignored by almost everyone. I want to fix things before it's too late and one of the gifts I was given was the gift of words. And so, I write.
Quill
A Different Comment-Reply Thread
Dear @quillfire
Have you, for example, ever met a STEEM Whale or Witness in person? What about you? I don't think most of those people would bother to even talk to someone with small SP. That's how I see "big players" here.
Cheers
Piotr
quillfire (56)
I have had a couple of superficial communications with a couple of Whales and a Hell of a dust-up with a Witness Group (4 members) regarding proposed reforms to the blockchain ... they DO NOT want Rules of Conduct that would prevent vote selling/buying.
The value of an idea is independent of the pedigree of its author ... and that is one of the huge dangers of the STEEM/Steemit model. The big players are big players (with perhaps a small number of exceptions) because they were miners or early adopters ... essentially, they were in the right place at the right time. Hence ... techies.
Being able to write Python is but a fraction of the knowledge required to effectively manage a cryptocurrency. The knowledge-base amongst Whales and Witnesses is EXTREMELY skewed towards IT and noticeably deficient in basic business management skills. I used to manage of couple of hedge funds (one a currency-trading fund) and am very familiar with the financial, economic and legal issues that will effect STEEM but which have nothing to do with 'coding.' These issues are every bit as important, if not more so, than DApps ... and yet they are being largely ignored.
For example, SMT's will ABSOLUTELY be considered securities by the SEC and other world securities agencies. And yet, people still think that they'll just pay a dollar, start a SMT and do an ICO. The utterly ignorant think that they won't be subject to SEC jurisdiction just because they don't want to be ... as if, somehow, it will be "their choice" (ignorant Anarchist ideological baloney). This is off-the-scale amateurishness. It costs tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to set up even the simplest of non-US offshore structures and once you involve securities, that amount increases exponentially.
The US government has a plethora of ways to "establish jurisdiction" and has an extremely long and successful history of doing so. All of the US-based Witnesses, nodes and users ... not to mention Steemit Inc.'s US residence ... will be more than enough to establish a nexus.
I'm not being mean for the sake of being mean. I love Steemit and desperately want it to succeed. But a level of professionalism (and realism), that is at present wholly absent, will be required if it is to survive.
Quill
You are exactly right. Basically the saving grace for Steem right now is that it is such a small bit player that it is under the radar of SEC / fed or at least is not any kind of priority in comparison to scam ICOs and exchanges playing fast and loose with the rules.
quillfire (56)
@carlgnash,
Carl, you're dead on. "Legalities" are not an after-thought like choosing the colors for a brochure. They are a core consideration around which all else revolves. And yet ... no one even mentions legal issues. Two hours with a securities lawyer, especially one versed in Offshore Law, would have articulated a hornet's nest of problems relating to SMT's.
And bidbots.
As I've written elsewhere, Witnesses are not "Corporate Directors" under the law ... but they may well be "Trustees." A Trust is not a legal entity like a corporation, it is a "Series of Relationships" ... and courts the world over have long ruled that "Trustees have a fiduciary duty to beneficiaries" (to protect their financial best interests). The "Prudent Man Rule" bears heavily in such circumstances (What would a "Prudent Man" think or do in a similar situation? And know that the "everything's subjective" bullshit argument doesn't fly ... judges are more than happy to apply a "common sense" standard.)
"But there is no Trust Document ... so there can be no Trust."
Amateurs. Enter "Implied and Constructive Trusts" ... essentially legal fictions that courts impute where circumstances demonstrate that a Trust-like Relationship logically exists irrespective of the fact that a formal Trust [Agreement] was not entered into by the parties.
Do Witnesses have a fiduciary duty to ALL Steemians to ensure a fair and honest distribution of the Reward Pool? This is a complicated legal matter but if I were a betting man, I'd bet that they do. And yet, many of the Top 20 Witnesses OWN BIDBOTS ... while using their governing power to ensure that they aren't banned. This is the very dictionary definition of "self-dealing" ... a behavior that would set a judge's hair on fire.
All these shenanigans have their origins in Satoshi's Dream ... the creation of a parallel universe in which the governments of the Real World would be impotent ... Political Anarchism. It ought to be obvious by now that the governments of the world are not going to allow for such an occurrence. And, it ought to be similarly obvious that they possess the Power to Compel.
Here's the thing: Unlike 99% of crytpo-currencies, STEEM/Steemit doesn't need all this cloak-and-dagger nonsense.
Why not?
Because creating a Facebook/YouTube equivalent where creators and curators are compensated for their contribution is a KILLER APP!!!
There is untold billions in that idea and more than enough to go around. All we need do is ensure a fair and honest game where compensation is earned by merit, not manipulation. That's it. Everything else will take care of itself.
We've bitten off way more than we can chew. STEEM is trying to be a hundred things to people with a hundred different interests. We're trying to be Facebook and YouTube ... and Ethereum and EOS and a new venture capital model and a casino and a porn hub and a gaming hot spot, etc., etc. ... despite the fact that each of those companies/industries have market caps many orders of magnitude larger than STEEM's, and the fact that Steemit, STEEM's only functional App, can't even maintain 50,000 active users. We're the Bahamas trying to invade the US ... and England, France, Russia and China ... at the same time.
Perhaps we ought to consider... focusing. You know, "concentration of force."
Horizontal Line Extensions are one of the riskiest endeavors that Fortune 500 Companies ever undertake, even with multi-billion dollar cash reserves. Nike couldn't make Nike Golf work and had to throw in the towel. And yet, STEEM already has its finger in a hundred pies: Jack of All Trades, Master of None.
This is NOT a sustainable strategy.
Steemit Inc. needs to hire:
1. A businessperson with absolutely no IT experience (and preferably a disdain, bordering upon loathing, for coders); and
2. Gray hair.
Quill
Dear @quillfire
I never knew that SMT would be considered a security. Oh. That's changing a lot. Your knowledge is simply mind-blowing.
Yours
Piotr
quillfire (56)
@crypto.piotr,
You took it as an article of faith that the "Big Boys" must have resolved all the issues ... or why else would they have spent gargantuan amounts of time, money and effort creating SMT's, right?
Well, that's why I'm so concerned ... not only have they not addressed any of these issues, they don't even appear to know that they ought to.
Unfortunately, the crypto-world possesses one, and only one, skill ... writing code. Even more unfortunate is the fact that the crypto-world is awash with the belief that such code makes them impervious to "Real World laws and regulations."
As can already be seen, that is not true. Governments by their very nature, act slowly ... but they act. And when they do all the smarty-pants dream-schemers end up bankrupt, in jail ... or both.
Quill
Quill
You guys know the QuillDrill. Be verbose ... but articulate.
And remember ...
Go Love A Starving Poet
For God's sake ... they're starving!
