This isn't about "stopping" him, it's about giving rewards back to the pool and not to a single users.

Fuck, you're clueless...

How's that going for you so far? Doesn't seem like it's working.

What exactly are you trying to do, anyway? Aren't you trying to get him to stop upvoting his own posts?

Think about it like this:

He is upvoting his own posts because it makes money.
In order to stop upvoting his own posts, he needs to stop making money from it.
Or he needs to find something that's even more worth his time.

So you have 2 choices:

1. You can try and make it not worth his time to continue
2. You can help him find something that's more worth his time

You have been trying option 1 for a while and it's not working. You're not very diplomatic about it but I think even if you were the smoothest talker in the world, you'd have a hard time getting everyone to participate just because it requires too much coordination for something that quite frankly, people don't really notice.

As long as it is profitable, he will keep doing it. That's all I'm saying. So you can either continue to waste your time with your 3 sentence posts interspersed between calling out witnesses or whatever else you do on here, or you can make better use of your time and figure out a way to use what he's doing to "give rewards back to the pool."

For example, here are some ideas for you to mull on in between flagging people's posts:

Create a crypto publication that promote's @haejin's page in exchange for upvotes from @ranchorelaxo. Source the articles from Steemit users who are interested in writing about cryptocurrency. This would benefit @haejin as he would have additional exposure for his brand and he would also be giving back to the community in the form of upvotes.

This would also slightly lessen the amount of money he makes directly from upvotes, further diluting his earnings. He'd essentially be paying you to manage/source articles for a small crypto publication in exchange for doing it under his brand.

Pretty sure this idea could be expanded into other niches as well.

My point is that you are only looking at it from the negative side. All you see is one user who writing 10 posts a day and upvoting all of them from a powerful account and taking a large portion of the rewards pool.

What you are ignoring is:

One user is creating 10 posts per day
One user is creating 10 technical analysis posts about crypto per day
One user is motivated to spend all day in front of the computer writing posts on Steemit
One user is fully committed to spending 7 days a week on Steemit contributing to the platform
One user is spending 100% of his time building his brand on this platform
One user has created a fan base by teaching them how to make money with trading cryptocurrency

If you were to take away the fact that he is taking a massive amount from the reward pool, you would consider him the ideal Steemit user.

What I'm telling you is to use that to your advantage instead of fighting it. You won't win the fight unless you go to his house and take away his computer. Somehow I don't think that's going to happen.

So why not utilize the amount of work he is putting into this platform to make it a better place? The guy basically has a $1000/day budget to pay writers to create content for him. With that kind of budget, you can create a website that rivals CCN and Coindesk in terms of the volume of articles. You also happen to be reading this comment on a platform that has a high percentage of users that are interested in cryptocurrency. Users who would be willing to accept payment in crypto in exchange for articles written.

Shit, with that kind of money you can create an online publication in literally any niche you want. Multiple niches even. With $30k/month you can do a lot.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

I don't understand why people are so short-sighted on here. Yes, the platform was created to reward individual users for posting their content. But now we have a situation where a small % of them have control over the website and there is nothing any of us can do about it. So what's the plan? Complain about it from behind a veil of anonymity with 2 sentence posts and hope for the best?

Or is it maybe time to admit that the platform will never reach the utopian state that @dan and @ned allegedly had for it and change your goal? You can still push this place in the direction you want, but instead of fighting people you don't agree with, why not see if you can work with them and compromise?