— SteemCN

skreza (61) · 6 years ago

I have to disagree with you.. Voting bots and vote selling and buying are now like a "culture" of Steemit. Automated income from delegations is a good and proven business model on Steemit and investors do get a good return from it, on some days the income can be low, and most of all its a secure method, it's like you are giving someone loan and you can get your initial amount back anytime you want, except that a 7 day wait is necessary.

$0.08

3 votes

somethingsubtle (56) · 6 years ago (edited)

I agree that it is now one of the cultures of Steemit. However, I would argue it is not a sustainable one.

It is rent-seeking behavior that ultimately devalues steem and requires new investors to enter the system for it to be sustainable. Fortunately, we are still in a space where new people are entering the crypto and Steemit ecosystems all the time, but may not always be the case if their is less and less quality on the platform. It'll become the first decentralized blogging platform for bots: Bots will post the content, they will upvote the content, and the ponzi scheme will fall down.

For a sustained value, Steemit needs to make sure its supporting quality content and earnest connections between people.

$1.35

14 votes

attoan.cmt (65) · 6 years ago

I totally agree with you. What makes Steem different is the value of the content provided here.

$0.28

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

Did your crystal ball tell you that?

$0.08

somethingsubtle (56) · 6 years ago

No crystal ball, but the incentives and outcome of those incentives seem pretty clear.

Any content can reach the Trending page by buying votes.
Given that, would most people invest time and effort in quality content, average content, or shitty content if they all have the same outcome?
This would cause the content on Trending to trend downward in quality, meaning the fundamental connection of "high payout" = "high quality" is broken.
These actions will devalue SBD, Steem and Steemit as a whole since its associated with less and less worthwhile posts.
Yet, to buy votes, you must invest in SBD or Steem, which means you funneling value into a system that ultimately degrades that value over time.

Conclusion: The rent-seeking behavior of bidbots is not sustainable compared to the original goal of 'high payout' = 'high quality' where readers and content creators are driven to the platform to find quality work and connections.

For real-world examples, look at the 2008 housing bubble - people were inflating a system of shitty assets because everyone thought they were worth more than they really were. As time went on, the assets just got shittier as more people entered the market buying homes at inflated prices with loans they could never afford. All of it driven by greed.

$0.41

5 votes

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago (edited)

All of the content here is overvalued. There isn't a huge market for Internet bloggers besides advertising.

The average user on Facebook affords the company $19 dollars a year. We are early in the process, people are being overpaid.

There is no plan to sustain exactly what is happening today, none of it is sustainable with or without the bots, if you want to look at it from that point of view.

I do appreciate you were able to give your statement some reasoning. It's the new catchphrase on SteemIt.

"It is unsustainable". Of course it is, so was Amazon, and Facebook and many other business models. We are a work in progress, not an established business.

$0.05

peterkrackpotkin (48) · 6 years ago

"There is no plan to sustain exactly what is happening today"

What is the plan then?

$0.14

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

It is up to those who want to build on the Steem Blockchain. There is actually nobody that I know of that expects the current situation to be sustainable.

SteemIt Inc. Has a road map, many other platforms are in development. You guys are fighting about the flag ship.

This is not the plan this is a stage on the way to building more. Nobody knows what will happen. Investing in crypto is a risk. Putting time into the platform is a risk.

Content is not our best asset, it hold very little market value.

That's my view. If you don't like it, make up your own. I say that with 0 snark. We are building it, it isn't done yet.

$0.08

somethingsubtle (56) · 6 years ago

Sit back and watch the whales take their cut while the market is still high.

$0.07

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

If it bothers you don't watch. I hope they become Billionaires. I'm on the same team.

$0.00

phoneinf (72) · 6 years ago

I love you whatsup! 😂🔮🎩

$0.09

ijavee (60) · 6 years ago

'and requires new investors to enter the system for it to be sustainable'

Is there a Bernie Madoff and another Ponzi in the house then !

$0.05

toddrjohnson (54) · 6 years ago

I agree, but at this point, Steemit is not doing that. I've only been on for a week and I already find myself upvoting my own posts (something that it seems the system should not allow if quality is important) and even being tempted to upvote posts that I think might get big rewards without even reading them. My own content may actually be valuable to a certain audience, but the chances of that audience seeing it is miniscule. I live in Houston, so to borrow a meme: Steemit, we have a problem.

$0.00

peterkrackpotkin (48) · 6 years ago

Get your 13 weeks started quick!

$0.07

mensinvictamanet (25) · 6 years ago

Yeah this reeks of a scam, and honestly reflects poorly on all of Steemit. Is this what this place is becoming?

$0.00

sieses (65) · 6 years ago

Lol, right people just started and already screaming scam? Salty much? Feeling entitled to some free money? I joined a year ago, I can tell you this aint no scam. But no free money for nothing either, been at it for a year and it its definitely pays more than facebook or whatever,but yeah keep screaming scam that wil help you out just fine i'm sure!!

$0.00