Topic: Steemit how can this thing be workable long term? - page 19. (Read 32368 times)

Wow respect, i see some people who usually stand on morale high ground here defending and shilling for such a scam mining.... wtf is going on here.

The rewards are supposed to sustain a much broader content base. Less content (as we have right now) gets bigger slices of the reward pie. That's normal.

So, in the future, when userbase multiplies, instead of having say 10 posts that make 10k => you'll have 100 posts that make 1k.

Of course I don't. I agree on all counts except the small point on them making most of their SP early on. No payouts were made until July 4 and all posts up until that point had to compete from the same pool. This may have been somewhat easier than the current pool, but not by a large factor (in fact price appreciation since increasing the size of the pool is probably more significant).

BTW, speaking of Max Kaiser: https://twitter.com/maxkeiser/status/754110399666987009

Apologies I am spamming this thread so I will go sleep. But I just wanted to share that one of the hero bloggers smooth cited, is only 30 and he is already noting that the eyes suffer (as I noted my eye not eyes is starting to say "No mas!"):

When I can go the mall in Mindanao and get people to say they are interested to check out Steemit, something earth shattering appears to have changed, at least conceptually if not also actually virally now. Whether that translates to the success of Streemit or not, is still unknown (see upthread criticisms and concerns). But a genie (concept) is now out of the bottle.

These are people had no idea Bitcoin or electronic money existed.

Efficient blogging! Wow. Can he replicate regularly.

As I expected, a good income but not instant newly millionaires. And I expect dilution to increase while marketcap may also increase.

EDIT (correction): I forgot to look at their wallet balances. I see they have somehow accumulated up to $300k since inception, yet I only see roughly $10k per week lately for them. They probably made much of their SP early on when no competition. So I guess I maintain that it is a lot of hard work to become a millionaire blogging on Steemit and competition is increasing.

If becoming a newly millionaire on Steem becomes easy, competition will arrive to make it not easy.

If you are a popular personality, e.g. Max Kaiser, then you were already a millionaire.

I don't see this as a problem. Do you?

My point was to CoinHoarder to not feel bad if can't become a millionaire (become super important in crypto) from Steem payouts. I think he is on his way to becoming a millionaire via investing in CC, assuming he has a job and has been investing his income in CC. If he is spending all his resources on university and student loans, then I think maybe he should reconsider that timing. University will become much less expensive after the coming global debt implosion. (However, I left the university early to work on my own s/w company at age 21, and unfortunately never got back to finish a minor in Math, so I am lacking knowledge of some higher maths which causes me some frustration now).

I think all of us realize to not let this CC opportunity pass us by. We are all trying to figure out how to maximize the ROI on our alliance to this phenomenon.

That is certainly true. When the real talent arrives the results will ecplise what any of the current crop are doing. But that requires a user base and traffic large enough to support such talent as well. Most (a few early adopters excepted) won't be bothered at the current scale.

Even so there are some talented bloggers who can keep it fresh and continue getting an audience. I wouldn't knock $100s either, especially high hundreds. That's good income for a blog post, especially for those who post regularly.

Here are three that come to mind right away (there are more, including some very distinct styles). Only one is really a subject matter expert (steemship -- attorney) the rest are just effective writers and interesting if not exactly always likable personalities. All have multiple posts >$1000 and consistent $100s. Check their wallet balances. I don't think any of them have invested outside money, but I could be wrong.

https://steemit.com/@cryptoctopus
https://steemit.com/@steemship
https://steemit.com/@stellabelle

So many little "bugs" (or feature requests) needed. e.g. this does not link to my comment post correctly because there is not enough unused whitespace at the end of the page:

https://steemit.com/steemit/@anonymint/improving-steem-s-rankings-to-cater-to-diverse-content-preferences#@anonymint/re-biophil-re-anonymint-improving-steem-s-rankings-to-cater-to-diverse-content-preferences-20160718t201929410z

I am a perfectionist (must be my German bloodline).

The expert bloggers I've seen on the site are averaging $100s payouts, not $1000s. So my point remains. I'd love to see some evidence? Are you thinking the most expert have not arrived yet?

Also with such a small window of those who can win the lottery, the experts dilute each other.

So you see my interest rate risk point now. ICOs have lower interest rate risk because there is a very small lockup time. It was interesting to me that Dan and I had devised the same solution independently. So now you know conceptually (not at all the same though as Steem Power concept) what my solution is for a project launch.

Note that the issue interest rate risk can be orthogonal to whether a project is "sneaky launched", but in the case of Steem it was necessary to sneaky launch in order for the developers to have enough SP to accomplish their goals of awarding tokens to the masses when they signup.

The side-effect of the sneaky launch is it created coattail whales such as yourself.

I'll argue that if there is no concentration of coins amongst the developers, then the project will go no where. The goal should be for the distribution to diversify over time, which appears to be the sticking point thus far for all of crypto. Seems that making a coin very popular is the key ingredient needed to diversify the token. Even whales will have an opportunity cost of continuing to hold indefinitely a mature, widely popular CC.

Part of the talent is keeping it fresh and not pushing one topic to the point of exhaustion. The best blogging personalities do it well. Subject matter experts are not always expert bloggers.

Agreed those that can win the lottery are filtered first by quality by the whales (which doesn't solve the one-size-fits-all problem).

And my point remains, e.g. Biophil is finding out that eventually the site grows weary of the same expertise:

https://steemit.com/gametheory/@biophil/what-s-a-minnow-to-do-the-game-theory-of-steem-part-4

I am thinking it is difficult for one person to win that lottery ongoing. As I said, maybe one or two people are exceptional enough to do it. Maybe I am wrong. I would like to see some evidence?

"Guaranteed"

My point was specifically addressing ICOs which claim high participation as a marketing technique. It is true that credit could be used to pump a market directly, but the lender is taking a real risk here, unlike the case of an ICO where shill buyers is just a fake transaction with no risk at all.

Anyway, yes some sort of credit could probably be arranged, even with risk. I kind of consider that to be "other resources" of which many variations exist.


Empirically some posters are consistently doing better. You could call that groupthink about which posters or types of posts to look for, but my observation is that it correlates with some expansive definitions of quality. I think the momentum argument is valid, but 'quality' (however you want to define that) serves as an early tipping point which determines which points start to get momentum. Yes I do think the beauty makeover had a form of quality, but other posts and posters with more 'substance' have as well. (Sorry, if we may disagree on the beauty makeover post, but that's a small point anyway,)

Not exactly. Perhaps you forgot your own major point to me, that insiders can take out loans and pay them back with their guaranteed revenue stream. Obviously in this case they need to take out loans in Steem tokens and I don't know what the interest rate would be.

Apparently the CEO of Streemit is in control of 80% of the SP and could sell that at any time (even perhaps facilitating the sale by selling the private keys thus not being visible on the blockchain), even though it takes 1 year of weighted average time to cash out. I'd urge him to do so now and start supporting the price. Not doing so is not being competitive against tokens that are upward price manipulated (e.g. apparently Ethereum) in this speculation market place (the free market forces us to do it, whether we like it or not). Of course, one has to weigh the legal risks though.

I am adopting smooth's recent pragmatic (and admirably free market, anarchistic) stance, which appears to be that all that matters now is winning and getting the masses into CC. And speculators get a game to play along the way.

Morals are arbitrary (e.g. unfalsifiable, ambiguous Buttery Effects, etc) jails shit for church.

Perhaps someone needs to whisper to them to not be losers. Our goal is to make CC successful. Any path that can get us there should meet our ethics, as long as the end result is permissionless, trustless and thus bettering humanity (or bettering humanity in any other way, which might mean just being successful in any way we can).

Would doing so obscure valuable market pricing information? That is something to ponder and argue.


My prior post refutes that whales can increase their wealth significantly via voting, thus I don't understand how personality has anything to do with being a regular winner of the groupthink lottery? That lottery is that which ever posts gain the most momentum, also more or less get the most votes.

Obviously a post that is extremely important such as my recent one, is going to have a very good chance of winning that lottery. But can I do that consistently? I doubt it. We'll see...

https://steemit.com/steemit/@sephiroth/i-ve-been-wanting-to-get-an-answer-on-this-what-s-to-prevent-someone-from-selling-their-votes-what-if-a-whale-sells-their-usd100#@anonymint/re-sephiroth-re-sephiroth-i-ve-been-wanting-to-get-an-answer-on-this-what-s-to-prevent-someone-from-selling-their-votes-what-if-a-whale-sells-their-usd100-20160719t030102884z

honestly im quite shocked...
what is sneaky-mine even means is it like monero old crippled miner thing which make former dev rich

Their holdings are illiquid and quite transparent and only a small portion has been liquidated (and if you work out the numbers and think about the likely run rate for the development team, it has very likely been spent). They may have other resources, but there are no ICO funds and there is no huge warchest from already-realized trading profits.

Yes, it was a sneaky-mine and it was underhanded, but when it comes to lack of transparency and opportunities for manipulation it is miles ahead of coins like Dash or Bytecoin (and Ethereum) where a huge slush fund was immediately (or at least almost immediately) available with no accountability at all.


If it is sustainable, even not with he current typical post values, I expect the most successful personalities to become quite wealthy. Power law returns and all that. Already a few have made $100K. Obviously a portion of that is being an early adopter of something that didn't crash and burn immediately, and it is also illiquid, But some of it is just being a top talent in a system set up to most reward the best of the best.

i wouldnt say milionaire, but damn, they are getting 10k+ buy writing posts like a makeup tutorial...
and dont get me wrong, any tutorial is good for the community, but 30k is way to much for any tutorial.

i dont see that being sustainable in the long run.

We have a sock-uppet vote system--

Discussion Topic here: https://steemit.com/steemit/@generalizethis/steemit-will-it-link-all-the-things-discussion-topic

(wonders how long it will take to want a moderation button)