Yea, since Larimer and company instamined 60, 70, 80+%, I'm sure everyone will want to do their part to make Larimer rich and soak up a few pennies in the process, which they'll be able to withdraw over the course of two years or so. If it didn't work with Bitcoin and voat, why would it work with some instamined scam token?
We have secured ~80% of the initial STEEM via mining. Our plan is to keep 20%, sell 20% to raise money, and give away 40% to attract users / referrers.
40% of it will be given to users. Notice it doesn't cost anything to register an account and you get (I think) $20 worth of tokens for doing so.
20% was necessary to fund development. Programs don't code themselves. Time is money. If the developers were not going to get paid, then it makes sense for them to do something else... like get a job.
Only keeping 20% of your company from the get go is a pretty low amount of equity to keep for a start up. Especially considering it is probably split in between at least a few people.
Except there's nothing from preventing them from posting early on and soaking up the huge first distribution under the guise of "paying content providers". It's marketed as being decentralized - it's not, and there's no way to tell how many coins or vests or dollars out whatever other convoluted tokens are being held by the company that backs it. If you want to run a company, why do you need to pretend that there was a "fair mining launch with no instamine" and that is distributed? My two guesses would be duping suckers and tax avoidance/fraud.
The sneeky-mine coins went into the 'steemit' account. That huge account (I think that is around 60% currently, but it may be less as they are giving away coins to new user signups at a rapid pace given the high level of publicity) does not post, does not vote, and does not earn rewards. It just sits there transparently, slowly giving away a steady stream of coins to new user signups (and some exchange dumping to fund development, also plainly visible).
It is a very transparent blockchain, with no privacy features at all, and named accounts. That works in their favor in terms of developer transparency.
There is nothing in your post that explains how the effect of 100% inflation is offset for steem power holders
STEEM POWER is awarded 9 STEEM for every 1 STEEM that is printed, which offsets inflation for STEEM POWER stakeholders to approximately 11.11%.
so you are basically saying that inflation is offset by injecting more steem into the system ..oookayyyy
Inflation that is done by giving coins to someone else is not the same as inflation which gives coins to people who already own coins. The latter is more like a stock split and has no real effect on the value of your holdings. You might go from owning 1 STEEM worth $1 each to owning 10 STEEM worth $0.10 each (still worth $1 in total). Net result is little to no change in the value of your holding despite the high nominal inflation.
This doesn't make sense, if the steem are sellable on the market whether you give it to people who already own steem or not is irrelevant, there will be more steem in circulation and those steem will hit the market at some point
Please research the concept of a stock split. Until you understand it you will likely be lost here.
BTW, Steem has an automatic 1-10 reverse split every 3 years which reverses the cumulative effect of the previous three years and prevents the individual token from becoming inconveniently small. If you think that ongoing stock splits are inflation, then the 1-10 reverse splits reverse the inflation right?
