I haven't been upvoted by the fulltimebot-net in a few days so I decided to see what was up.

Uh Oh

Looks like @haejin is at it again. Of course, this guy is a master of mental gymnastics.

https://steemit.com/proofofbrain/@kabir88/if-proof-of-work-consensus-failed-would-you-still-invest-in-bitcoin-so-why-are-we-letting-the-steem-proof-of-brain-consensus

https://steemit.com/proofofbrain/@kabir88/we-all-drink-from-the-same-watering-hole-someone-is-pissing-in-it-looking-the-other-way-won-t-change-what-you-re-drinking

You've got to realize that @kabir88 condones his own self upvoting at 100% for months. Yet, he steps out and downvotes others for self voting. Does that even make sense?

To me his is a hypocrite.

Let me go down to your level of IQ and REALLY simplify this:

WHO broke the truce? @kabir88, YOU, Hendrix22 and Fulltimegeek. WHO Cleans UP? All of YOU!

You upvoted kabir88's spam posts on my comments. A truce breaker! IS that HARD to understand?

Again, next move is yours! Cleanup and return to truce or not.

Wise words, spoken by a true champion of the Steem blockchain.

Who is this mysterious @kabir88? I don't know and it doesn't matter. Why? Because his account is only worth $4000.

Equating a $4000 account 100% upvoting themselves to a $1,800,000 account 100% upvoting themselves can only be done by pure delusion.

This situation ties in perfectly to an issue that I wanted to bring up.
My original title for this post was:

Steem 51% Consensus

Ok so imagine 75% of the Steem community gets it together and figures out a great system for distributing rewards. However, those pesky 25% are still doing greedy shit like self upvoting their own garbage and not respecting proof of brain. The answer is simple, right? Use the 75% to flag the 25% into the ground, and then you still have 50% stake left over to distribute fairly to the rest of the community.

However, you don't need 75%; you only need 50.00001%. As long as we had more than 50% consensus, we could flag the other 50% into the ground and still control 100% of the reward pool with the remaining 0.00001% of the stake. This would basically be the opposite of a 51% attack. It would be a 51% righteous takeover of the platform.

So why can't the whales of Steem get together and flag all this garbage on the trending tab into oblivion? Is greed really too strong? Maybe, but fear is equally strong. We can't expect @ned or Steemit to step in and flag these abusers. @ned and Steemit are straight up catering them. Many of the tactics Steem employs involve trying to get big investors to jump on board. Flagging your own investors seems somewhat counter productive. If a few whales were to dump their Steem all at once the value of coins would crash into the dirt.

Short-term vs Long-term

Personally I think this may be exactly what Steem needs. Decentralization is important. Better to build the platform up from nothing than let this corruption continue to feaster and eventually kill the entire community. We've already made too many concessions for the top one percent. I think it's obvious that we should demand that Steemit use it's centralized power to purge the platform of obvious abuse.

I mean it's obviously not going to happen. It doesn't matter what I want. @ned is far too afraid of failure to engage in such an aggressive gambit. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe not.

What I do know is that I'll be working on my own system of governance; one that will hopefully put Steem's current model to shame. In this decentralized environment of open source collaboration, sharing is caring. Perhaps I can bring something to the platform that is a win for everyone. This doesn't have to be a zero-sum game. Everyone can win.

Return from Snip Snap Flag Wars Are Back to edicted's Web3 Blog