Out of the woods? Maybe not quite yet, but it is nice to see that the Steem feed price has moved up from the adjusted 20 cents to 21 cents due to the price movement. Only another 40x to go to hit an All Time high!
Again, my small Steem sell was just a touch too high above the spike before the pullback. I even mentally set it first, and then lowered it slightly to try and trick it into being "on point", but no. I think someone is watching my trades...
Cryptonoia: the belief of crypto traders that their buy and sell points are being observed and avoided just to fuck with them.
I got a comment today with a hypothetical regarding downvoting (something they don't seem to like) that asked something like, Would I be okay if the Chinese Censorship Brigade bought a lot of Steem, increased their REP to 82 and then obliterated my account until it was -11 and hidden away.
Firstly, the number mentioned was 2 million Steem, but that wouldn't be enough to increase their Reputation significantly fast enough and that would be noticed. They would be better off buying a high rep account instead. I am sure Kingscrown would sell his and move onto one of his many alts. Secondly, that amount while significant, would still take an eternity to lower my rep to the auto grey point.
But anyway, let's say they buy 20 million instead.
Yeah, I would be okay with that. Firstly, it would create a nice bump in price and decrease liquid supply by 20%. I would even keep posting and make sure that they used as much VP as I could force them into using just for the fun of it. I would be very interested to see how the community would react and if the tools of decentralization are robust enough to counter.
But more than that, I would like to see how price would cope and if SMTs came into play in the way that they could and provide an uncageable decentralized animal. The thing is, that if an account was able to affect the decentralization so heavily, Steem loses its value. But to do so, that "Chinese account" would have to be able to corrupt all consensus witnesses. The moment that happens, the blockchain gets copied and a new blockchain with new witnesses springs into life, or the old ones that were forced out of Steem.
But, this and a million other things aside....
This isn't censorship!!!
The blockchain would keep recording my posts and comments as long as I have the possibility to post and comment. To censor me from Steem they would have to stop me from posting and commenting, which would mean forking me out in a centralized manner, and the project is dead anyway.
Steem is censorship resistant and as I said in replies, there are many front ends that do not even grey downvoted to oblivion posts and, anyone can make another. People seem to commonly call downvoting censorship when what they actually are doing is piggybacking another aspect of the blockchain onto their "claim". Earnings.
While anyone can essentially say whatever they want on the Steem blockchain, meaning they have freedom of speech - Freedom of Speech doesn't come with the addition of freedom to earn on what is said. Pull your head out of your arses, if you think that your freedom to speak also includes your earnings.
If for example, you choose not to speak what you want because it will cost you votes or your stupid reputation, that is on you and perhaps you should reflect on how strong and how much you believe your own convictions. If your freedom is affected by your need to earn - you are not free.
Then there is the other thing. What the fuck do I say that is so important that censorship even matters to me? I do not believe that anything I say here is so important that it truly matters if I got censored or not - how full of themselves are people these days - Perhaps there are lots of people who think they are Jesus reincarnated or something.
Don't get me wrong here, people can and are being censored on the centralized platforms like Twitter and YouTube, because they do not for whatever reason forward the agenda of the platform. People need to remember something. Ready???
All of these platforms are opt-in and your account is not owned by you. Ever.
You are choosing to agree to their terms and conditions and, they can kick you the fuck out of their house while under their digital roof whenever the fuck they want to. You are censored on their platform - not in your walking life.
And then there is Steem
Steem is an opt-in platform too and on Steem I own my account, which means it is very difficult for anyone to take away my ability to speak here, even if many could take away my ability to earn here. Censorship resistance is not overly important to me personally, but I love that this is available to anyone who opts themselves into Steem, which is why I keep opting myself in. Once here, people's words are protected by dozens of witnesses spread around the world, and tens of thousands of accounts that have stake in the future of the platform.
Essentially, if one is worried about being censored,
Steem is currently the only place to be online.
I would rather have my account obliterated here through a highly convoluted, complicated and very expensive process than -
have it deleted at the click of a button anywhere else.
But, that is just me.
and this is Steem
So, you can speak for yourself.
Taraz
[ a Steem original ]
Posted via Steemleo
Good points. I wrote a post the other day about a guy that was downvoting me. It wasn't until I finished my post that I realized I don't really care as much as I thought I did (about getting downvoted). The result of the downvotes have very little impact on my account and if they are spending their VP focusing on me, then that is other legitimate people that they are leaving alone. I figure it is a win win for everyone :)
Yah, it isn't the end of the world and even though it is annoying to get especially if frequently and large, at the end of the day they will move on. I make sure that it will at least cost them if they want to downvote my every post, so I will post at least 3 times a day when they do, as they only have 2.5 free ;D
Haha, that is an awesome idea. I hadn't thought about that.
It means that in order to suppress me, they are less likely to suppress others simultaneously. What they remove from me goes back into the pool for reallocation.
While it is annoying because I work very hard on my content and for Steem - it isn't going to kill me, nor is it going to stop me from doing what I do.
!ENGAGE 30
@bozz you have received
30 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
It's so weird to trade 1 SBD for 5 Steem now that SBD is being printed again. IMO anything less than 40 cents a coin is a steal.
It's also funny how people talk about reputation in the context of censorship. Do these people not realize that reputation is a centralized metric invented by Steemit Inc themselves? It has nothing to do with the Steem blockchain. So much to learn here, I'm guessing most users are clueless, and that ignorance will only get more pronounced as we enter a bull market and all the shitposters come out of the woodwork.
Steem is a steal with SD printing :D
I remember at the highs getting 1:7 but was very happy with 1:5 - one day people will miss these days because they missed these days.
Regardless of my reputation on Steem, my social reputation is intact, not that it matters much either. I think one of the gamifications of the internet is to encourage people to identify and box themselves into imaginary, ego-driven labels.
!ENGAGE 30
@edicted you have received
30 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
Steem is decentralize and censorship free downvotes are good to stop spamming butt as compare to other centerlized social media platforms steemit is best
For example on YouTube if your channel is disabled by YouTube team you can't even open your YouTube channel
But on steemit if someone downvoted or flagged you post you can still open your account and also you can do post and comment visibility or earning may decrease but it's also recovered when you get upvotes again
There are many benefits to steem, if only there were more users who understood them :)
As time passed more and more users understand it
I think people take the greyed out comments and post issue to serious. There was an individual that had all of his comments greyed out. It did not stop me from being curious as to what they said and looking at the comments. It was just a simple click to see the comment, most of the comments were relative to the post, I asked why, I was told, I gave my opinion, and the person's comments are no longer greyed out, I am pretty sure I did not persuade anyone to change their mind, but I spoke up. Even if they did not stop the auto down voting of this person I still would have seen each and every comment of his if I saw his name I would just ungrey it for myself.
On the other hand there are comments that are greyed out that I will not bother to look at, these are from disgruntled woe is me types, or spammer accounts. So the auto down votes do not bother me, people can still look and still see the comment. It is just a click away after all. I do still look on occasion to see if they have changed their ways and if they did then I will look at their comments and post also.
If a person is concerned that someone they follow is being censored all they have to do is look at the post. They can resteem it so others that follow them can see the post. They can make a post and then put a link to the greyed out post. There are ways and means to remove perceived censorship on the Steem Block Chain.
If they do not like the fact that a tribe or a community has blocked/muted a friend then they can always still use the steemit front end. Unfortunately if they did that they would have no reason to play the woe is me I am a victim card and try bullying others to get their way.
Look, my only concern is avoiding downvotes.
Nobody told me I shouldn't pay for bid-bots (isn't this a free-market).
Nobody told me I shouldn't self-vote (wtf).
Nobody told me I shouldn't copy stuff I posted on other blogs.
Nobody told me the whales can't be criticized.
I'm just trying to figure out "what the rules are".
There is no way, method, or manner to avoid down votes other to never post or comment. The Steemit FAQ on down votes: "Users are allowed to downvote for any reason that they want." So it is impossible to avoid down votes.
Bid Bot's Buying/selling Votes"Selling or offering to buy votes/resteems/follows, or schemes that facilitate this." is considered abuse.
The FAQ does have a lot of information in it. People just don't like to read it because then they do not have the sympathy card of I didn't know. There are a lot of things that people are never told, it does not take long to see the results of ones actions. If an individual does not like the consequence of what happened to them because of their own action, they can either ask the individual what they did wrong, ignore the issue and continue on with their ways, or change their ways, and the issue may go away.
The rules on steem block chain are like the rules in life, the laws are always changing based on what the leaders want or what the leaders perceive society wants, or what they feel would move society in one direction or another.
During WW2 in America there were rationing laws, and internment laws, and removal of freedoms for some groups of people, those laws at the time made sense to those in charge, and to most people because they did not vote those individuals out of office.
HF20/21 the EIP was talked about discussed, and voted on by the individuals that the users of the steem block chain voted in as witnesses, the majority of the stake agreed with the assessment because the majority of the same witnesses are still in the top 20.
As for "Nobody told me the whales can't be criticized." they can and often are. If it is criticism then they may look at it, if it is name calling and ranting and raving about their lack of brains or other such nonsense then retaliation is going to happen. To many people think statements such "You're an asshole" are criticism, it's not it's an opinion. Most so called criticism is nothing more than opinion.
A short search on the word criticism: "the act of expressing disapproval and of noting the problems or faults of a person or thing : the act of criticizing someone or something. : a remark or comment that expresses disapproval of someone or something."
Name calling is not criticism, attacking a person character is not criticism. To many of the people that say they were just criticizing a whale or an individual we instead attacking the individuals character
So, basically you're saying, "there are no rules".
I'm not, the FAQ pretty much says no rules when it comes to down votes. Society and the leaders of society change the rules when the rules need changing. The witness on steem can effect what rules get put in place.
There are rules, there are a lot of rules. People just like to think there are none, to think life is total anarchy with no collective direction of travel. There is a very wide spread diversification of rules in the world, and in our daily lives, and not all of them are written down.
The HF's are the rule changers on Steem Block Chain. People can either accept them try to change them in the next HF, or ignore them and live with the consequences.
I do not like the down vote issue. It has always been broken since I have been on steem block chain. I have put my thoughts and ideas out there as to how I think it could be fixed. I really do not like the blind down vote Army that makes no post, leaves no comments, and does nothing but down vote. I have urged the removal of the delegated steem and I have made suggestions on an auto comment in the down voters name and account so that the community can decide if the down vote was justified.
if people see something they do not like make a post, or leave comments/ideas on fixing it on those post that ask for opinions on the direction of steem block chain. Go on discord or in the steem chat rooms and leave messages. (I try to no longer use the chat or discord). There are ways and means to get ideas out there to effect change, will those ideas get adopted at some point in time, will the right people see the idea at the right time, no one knows. I do know, I do know, if the idea of fixing something is not put out there then there is no chance in hell of that non-published idea being adopted.
Well, as long as rampant downvoting feeds the "reward pool" and the "reward pool" feeds the top-earners and witnesses, the powers-that-be will continue to encourage (ignore) abusive downvoting.
nOW, how do we onboard new users..?
Oh, yes, tell the newbz some evil people are posting nasty stuff on steemit and they need to open an account so they can DOWNVOTE them!!!
100 million new steemians practically overnight!
It is funny when it comes to some of the people who I have heard complain. There was one who said that using another frontend than Steemit is not viable, because they don't like the layouts of the others and they are used to Steemit. First-world problems.
I think the tribes are a pretty good mechanism to avoid censorship and, it is possible to create an identical Steemit frontend if one chooses, I even think it is opensource for the most part.
!ENGAGE 30
@bashadow you have received
30 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
I, I, I. Me, me, me. Selfie culture, 15 minutes of fame. I did it, not us. I deserve it, not us. Everything I say, people listen and care to like or to upset themselves.
Oooooooo... crap. :D Been there, thought like that too.
No-one cares and I don't matter. A liberating thought I think.
It's not just you.
I agree. I think our egos get ahead of reality.
!ENGAGE 20
@insaneworks you have received
20 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
There is so much in this post, it’s hard to know where to begin. I am happy that the price is improving.
Thanks for tackling censorship issue it’s a very divisive one and an ongoing discussion of how even grey posts are visible if you wish yo see them. It appears that central tenet of earnings being yours in seven days are being debated, as all rules should be in a community and if there is enough interest voted upon.
The inflation pool works in a very precise manner, some people believe it works how they think it works :)
!ENGAGE 20
@shortsegments you have received
20 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
The ability to speak freely, not earn freely
Also, does this mean you believe that if you don't like a shop owner (who isn't doing anything illegal) or you don't like the patrons of that shop, that you should be able to take money from their till and redistribute it to other shops?
no you can't:
Read the Steem Whitepaper.
Damn! Even on reply, I can't beat Taraz! :)
The money isn't "in the bank" until the end of the day when the deposit is made.
The tip-jar isn't emptied into the bartender's or street-musician's pocket until the end of the night.
If I leave someone an upvote, that's essentially a tip for that specific post and that specific account.
I'm fully intending to contribute to and encourage their efforts.
And if someone who disagrees with that post or doesn't like that account downvotes that same post with enough steem-power, they REDIRECT MY VOTE (tip) to "the reward pool", where it gets distributed to the TOP EARNERS.
My vote is canceled.
Please explain what you would consider a real-world equivalent to this "give to the commons" moral theory of yours.
Perhaps a charity box at a church that gets redistributed to the poor?
Would it be like having a hundred charity boxes, each with someone's name on it?
And then if one box got "too many" contributions, the church leaders would "redistribute" those donations to the TOP EARNERS?
How does this make sense to anyone?
;D
Ah, you have made a common error here with the way Steem works. The Steem is not in the till for 7 days.
Downvotes do not take Steem that is owned, they redirect Steem that has been earmarked. Up until payout time when the Steem moves into an actual wallet, that Steem is still in the pool and is open to negotiation. For seven days the Steem is in the stake-directed market flow and not until it is in an account wallet does it become owned. Once owned, it is owned and it is up to the owner what they do with it.
No one is taking money from a shopkeepers till.
The money isn't "in the bank" until the end of the day when the deposit is made.
The tip-jar isn't emptied into the bartender's or street-musician's pocket until the end of the night.
If I leave someone an upvote, that's essentially a tip for that specific post and that specific account.
I'm fully intending to contribute to and encourage their efforts.
And if someone who disagrees with that post or doesn't like that account downvotes that same post with enough steem-power, they REDIRECT MY VOTE (tip) to "the reward pool", where it gets distributed to the TOP EARNERS.
My vote is canceled.
Please explain what you would consider a real-world equivalent to this "give to the commons" moral theory of yours.
Perhaps a charity box at a church that gets redistributed to the poor?
Would it be like having a hundred charity boxes, each with someone's name on it?
And then if one box got "too many" contributions, the church leaders would "redistribute" those donations to the TOP EARNERS?
How does this make sense to anyone?
The till is owned, as is the tip jar, they are not public property.
Again, I will explain. Your tip isn't immediately from the pool to the post, it is earmarked for seven days and no, it isn't for a specific amount at all. Your vote percentage might be static, the vote value is not and will be affected by other things like how much the amount is on that post now. For example, if your vote is 10 cents on a post with no other votes, it is 10 cents (affected by all other votes of course in the system having an effect on the pool). However, if a large voter comes in and adds a vote on top, your vote might be worth 20 cents. You can test this by for example, voting on a zero voted post, and then voting on one in trending.
For whatever reason, you seem to be quite emotional about the mechanics here. However, consider if YouTube allowed all uploaders to decide how much of the money they pay to content contributors they get. Do you think it would accurately represent value if left unchallenged?
ISN'T THAT WHAT PA.TREON IS FOR?
should pa.treon offer a feature where you can pay to cancel other people's subscriptions to accounts you DOnT LIke?
I don't like this yo.utuber, I'll open a pa.treon(-) account and cancel the subscriptions of all their supporters. Because I disagree with them.
I'm sure pa.treon(-) would make tons of money!
The patreon account doesn't choose what they get paid, the subscriber does.
The pa.treon account sets the bar for subscriptions and offers incentives $1 a month, $10 a month, $100 a month. So they sort of set their own price.
Now imagine if pa.treon allowed people to sign up NEGATIVE subscriptions.
That would be the equivalent of a downvote on pa.treon.
Do you believe NEGATIVE subscriptions would IMPROVE the pa.treon platform?
do you think it would attract more users or do you think it would drive users AWAY?
Have people always conflated weird things or is it a recent development?
Always I guess. I think now we live in a more conceptualized world with less connection to things we can hold, making it easier to get confused as one must be able to visualize for themselves. In the past, you could just hand them the thing and ask, "see?"
Congratulations @tarazkp!
Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:
And I wouldn't want to be anywhere else but Steem for that exact reason !!
yep.