OK, steem and real life are different animals.
IRL, free loaders are being carried now with the added drain of the govt workers needed to herd them.
On steem, low effort posts counterfeit steem.
It devalues all the other steem.
I put in the labor to get it, how is it not my stake?
I strongly disagree. The principles of "community property" apply, regardless of how "hypothetical" or "practical" the application may be.
Imagine a city in the desert.
The city has a central well. Actually, it's a cistern.
The cistern is refilled once a week.
Citizens who invest in "cistern-corp" get a daily share of water proportional to their investment, the more you invest, the larger your daily share.
Citizens can give this daily share to others, or to themselves.
Citizens CAN be bribed and or bullied into giving their daily share to specific individuals.
Citizens can create posts on which to hang collection buckets.
The posts with the fullest buckets grow taller and are therefore visible to more citizens, attracting more attention and receive more contributions.
At the end of the seven day cistern cycle, any water that has not been distributed, or that has fallen through the grid-floor (below minimum contributions) gets dolled out to the tallest posts, with the tallest post getting the largest cut of the "leftover-pie" and any post with less than 20 droplets gets no additional cut of the "leftover-pie".
This system is fair because it gives the most to the (good-smart) rich and nothing to the (evil-dumb) poor.
This system is fair because instead of giving everyone a boost proportional to their investment, it gives MORE to the rich and STEALS from the poor.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes, valuing players who follow the rules.
Those that accept the status quo are rewarded more.
All rules(laws) favor the rich, or the rich change them.
When the rich(haves) is(are) eating from the work of the poor(havenots), what defense to all out enslavement does the poor have?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I agree (generally), and this, in-and-of-itself is not "bad" (natural law).
I only take issue with the hypocrisy of saying "high-quality-original-content" is rewarded, when, in reality, the "community leaders" are posting piles of remixed content they've "borrowed" from other sources (and piling votes into the open mouths of their 50 or so best-pals automatically, with no regard for "quality").
At what point does your appeal to Edward Bellamy (and Looking Backwards) become meaningless if you're just going to throw your hands in the air and submit to "natural law" anyway?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Do you contend that I think those shitposting golden children shouldn't be flagged?
That isn't how pop culture works, and once one of them burns you to the ground for a few days it takes the shine off taking one for the team, iyam.
Especially, when the team wouldn't take one for you.
This is why folks said steem was doomed from the get go, but I got faith in the greediness of humans not overwhelming their humanity.
As for throwing one's hands in the air, I've given my calendars to the struggle to be free, time for the youth to carry the ball.
Or, the ideas to die to prevent lives such as mine.
The ideas ain't gonna die, unless they can censor the web.
The fire in the minds of men lives as long as I do.
And, maybe, you, too.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Perhaps we agree on this specific point, but what we appear to disagree on is slightly more fundamental.
Should any post be downvoted and should downvotes affect ALL posts by the same account that are unrelated to the downvoted post?
You seem to think downvoting is "essential" to "protect" "your" share-of-the-reward-pool-pie.
What makes you think this?
What data are you basing this opinion on?
Wouldn't simply voting for yourself be the best (most efficient) way to insure you get your full share?
Wouldn't "protecting the individual sovereignty" of each account (from coercion, bribes and bullies) be the "best" way to insure "voluntarism" (truly voluntary cooperation) AND a truly FREE-MARKET?
Doesn't the fact that some accounts want to "scam" as much steem as possible actually drive adoption forward and bolster the market-value?
For example, De Beers loves it when movies and television shows and news stories FEATURE diamond thieves!!
Because simply the idea that people are desperate to STEAL their (relatively) worthless rocks makes people think they must be super-valuable!
For example when I first started investigating "the bigger picture" of this steem-economy animal, my first data-point was "which account has the most steem-power". I glossed over steemit's huge stake, thinking "ok, that's probably reserved for the devs" and started looking at @freedom. I thought, rather naively, that somebody had invested millions of dollars into steem and then powered-it-up. They don't post or do any of the "normal" stuff, they just delegate to other accounts that PAY THEM BACK. I thought it was strange that someone with that much money would think steem was their "best investment option". Now I realize that nobody would do that. Those "huge" stakes were "ninja-mined", basically for free, and their "value" would quickly de-materialize if they ever tried to sell it (just like the ridiculous over-supply of diamonds in De Beer's secret vaults).
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit