RE: Ahead of @ned's live stream today.
This one started about 6 weeks ago so he is about halfway; 6 or 7 weeks to go. It's his Steem, but it's counter to what everybody is calling for: Buy more Steem and hodl. In all fairness he hasn't moved it yet, but he will be in a position to move all of it soon.
The whole issue I have with what I'm seeing is that Steem is traded like a commodity and there is no guarantee the markets will recover in a time span that is interesting to us. To think that money will move from 1 asset to another is also unlikely as other markets simply evaporate stock values; the money isn't there and investors aren't likely to sign up for Steem if they can simply buy BTC. That leaves me wondering where the "value" is coming from if not from new users buying Steem.
The other part of the story I'm not buying is the 2 whales who both support steem flag rewards, supposedly a countermeasure against abuse, were flagging the dog shit out of each other while leaving the low SP holders to go after abuse.
DLive leaving wasn't exactly a confidence booster either. People flagged the owner's posts as an emotional reaction, but I doubt many even tried to read his explanation.
At this time I have more questions than answers, but I'm not converting more BTC to Steem and since they move parallel I don't have to: when BTC drops, so does Steem. When I start seeing independent movement I'll re-evaluate.
Smart move. Those of us that are in crypto should be diversified in our spread.
I don't plan on dropping a good amount on Steem unless it becomes something like $0.01.
Until then, it's just cost-average from whatever amount leftover from my monthly purchases.
Can't say i disagree with any of that. I bullshit with the guys over at @steemflagrewards on their discord pretty often and they could really use some help from a couple larger accounts. They find some abusers that are just to damn big for sny of us to handle.
I like a few of the guys, Steve, Slobbers, and Enforcer here, but I seriously distrust some of the backers of that project. About 9 months ago I caught one admitting that it flags on request, suggesting that it does not work independently, but actually is an errand boy, or the "face" for a larger whale or group of whales. (not a position I would want to be in because I would also have to deal with the fallout)
If the abuse was bad enough and the abusive account to big to handle; why were project backers flagging each other instead of going after serious abuse? Could it be that it doesn't really matter? Why aren't they doing it now that they stopped flagging each other? It certainly was entertaining to watch but provided nothing of value other than a distraction from what was happening elsewhere.
Like I said, I have more questions than answers at this time. I'm looking for a reason to trust but not finding one.
I understand man. I understand. I don't ever get that deep into it. I just like to screw around here and there. :)
Delegation is like passive support you'd give to charities. Not all delegators feel compiled to be active in the projects they sponsor.
It's no different than people tossing change to Salvation Army instead of participating in their activities.
Yes I agree that is often the case, but in this case, the delegator's own comments and past actions would suggest that getting involved is exactly what he would do.