You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Steemit Is Changing - How It Affects You

in #steemit7 years ago

Don't quite understand what this means :

To truly realize a future where cryptocurrency helps us identify great infromation we need to leverage not "stake-weighted" voting, but "account-based" voting. 1 person, 1 vote. It's much more democratic that way.

But I am all for the change - got to move on to better things right?

Sort:  

It means that the voting system will be much fairer. Right now its easy for people with SP to earn a few SP extra by using bidbots, and of course people are abusing it with shit content and it ends up on the top articles, drawning out everything else.
The solution of having one vote per person is fairer, but again, is easy to manipulate as anyone can go get more than one account, and then use these accounts to vote on something they wrote.

Alls fun and games when humans finally get some freedoms lol.. hope this helped?

Thank you for the explanation. That would be interesting. The rich will not get richer and there will not be poor people at steemit. Everyone with an account will be equal. That would be really good for the newbies. I will not be able to continue my series on The Analogy Between Steemit and The World" https://steemit.com/life/@simply-me/analogy-between-steemit-and-the-world-1

Thx for sharing your view on that issue @movingman.
Wouldnt you be afraid that value of STEEM will drop because there will be no reason for anyone on steemit to keep his SP and most people will start powering down?

this in result will cause lose of interest within steemit community (crashing price of steem would kill this platform)

Sounds good for newbies and bad for anyone who has been here a while, or who invested here. So they are throwing the investors and content-creators under the bus, to bring on more new accounts?

My first thought was yeh that it would be shit for investers, and sure when I think about it more there will be so many new bogus accounts and the new steemit investment will be going into paying for new accounts, like, I could now say instead of buying actual steem i will start just buying accounts. Luckily i dont spend much time on laptops so this suggestion and the end result most likely wont be done by myself because I cant be fucked, BUT watch how many accounts will power down and just start turning steem into steem accounts, to be used to upvote own content..

Sounds like a clusterfuck.
On the plus side, more accounts should mean a higher steem price..

Why would more accounts mean a higher steem price, if those accounts each have 0 Steem? If Steem isn't necessary for voting, they'll just use empty accounts which can be created for free using the new lightning signups.

Maybe just the numbers from an outside invester would look appealing, to see that there was say 800,000 accounts and then it started doubling very quick, that could draw more bigtime investers in an effect the price. I cant see it lowering the value even if all those new "vote accounts" had 0 balance? unless there is a graph somewhere that says the values of wallets?

and actually there are whales already with 100s of accounts so...