The Exit Machine
Ten years after bitcoin started, I still hear many educated people saying "bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme" or "it has no value" (or both).
Some months ago, I wrote an article called "What's Bitcoin's Value?" discussing several more-or-less plausible "reasons for-", or "sources of-" bitcoin's value. I called the first and most important one "ideological value"
[...] people want to make a statement, to send a message, to protest against a system - the current financial system - seen as deeply flawed, unfair and exploitative.
In a sense, it has been said that bitcoin embodies yet another aspect of the "revolt against the global (financial) elites"
After 2008 and even more so after 2016, nobody will contest a pervasive feeling of decline in our civilization. The level of mistrust has greatly increased. We have lost trust in politicians, in media, in each other. Our societies seem to be tearing themselves apart, to have entered a destructive spiral of hysteria and radicalization.
The responses to decline in firms, organizations and states have been famously analyzed and explored in a landmark publication from the 70'-ies by Albert Hirschman, called "Exit, Voice and Loyalty".
If the underlying blockchain technology is a "trust machine", its first and most famous application, bitcoin, uses it to offer an "exit from the global financial system"
Loyalty
Someone who finds himself part of a declining firm, organization, or state can choose to "stay loyal":
"I think things are not going well at all but I trust the leadership: they have noticed it too, they have the right analysis and they will come up with solutions to our problems"
credit: GETTY Images
Voice
Those who trust the capacity of the system to right itself, to heal, even if they might not trust the existing leadership can choose the Voice option: expressing their unease, proposing an analysis, proposing solutions, protesting against the analysis put forward by the existing leadership or against the solutions, agitating for a change of leadership.
credit: "New Mail Nigeria"
Exit
However once loyalty to the leaders is lost and confidence in the "system" as a whole fades, the only reasonable answer is an "exit":
- an employee would seek another job
- a member of a trade union, a political party or another organization would resign
- a citizen of a state would emigrate
credit: Dreamstime
The Global Financial System
It used to be that if one wanted to live a decent (perhaps even prosperous) life, there were a few choices. Then the field narrowed drastically: with "capitalism" victorious, the "market economy" took hold in all prosperous countries, its "flavors" ever closer, its uniformity ever greater.
In practice, this was brought about by increased freedom in capital movement, free convertibility of currencies, closely aligned financial and monetary institutions, with independent central banks all aiming for a 2% inflation rate, all ending up resorting to "quantitative easing" (aka "money printing") when the economy stalled.
With the "rules of the game" the same everywhere, whether in Europe, US or Asia, the recipe for financial success began looking more and more similar all over the world.
The competition field for individual success gradually became global. Those who didn't want to join the "rat race", those not lucky enough or not good enough to succeed in one place found themselves with nowhere to go, with "no other game to play".
The global financial system offered no exit option.
Until the invention of bitcoin, that is...
Conclusion
As such, bitcoin provides a useful "safety valve" for a part of the discontent. The "defensive" narrative of "Bitcoin as the 'knight in shining armor', defending the victims of the 'banksters' from their oppressors" is quite strong and people believing in it justify a significant part of BTC's worth.
These words from my "What's Bitcoin's Value?" article are cast here into a classical, well-known analysis framework, that of Albert Hirschman's 1970's "Exit, Voice and Loyalty".
In a context where, although changing jobs, parties or countries is still possible, people started feeling oppressed by "the dictatorship of the financial system", the dictatorship of money. Indeed, the globalisation of the financial system left no "exit" option, right when it, witness the 2008 financial crisis, entered decline.
However, bitcoin alone cannot compete with the fiat currencies system. As The Economist observed back in June 2011:
Bitcoin is technically sophisticated. As a monetary system, it looks primitive.
source:Bits and bob
Back in March 2018, in another post titled Blockchain Revolution: Money and Credit, I was writing
Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies challenge the monopoly of fiat money thus enabling a new, complementary economy.
As I plan to discuss in a future paper, in order to mount a significant challenge to the dictatorship of the fiat money, bitcoin needs the help of the other blockchain systems with their cryptoeconomies and currencies. Bitcoin needs the "cryptoverse"
If you know what witnesses are and agree that people commited to keeping this blockchain ticking play an important role ...
(by simply clicking on the picture - thanks to SteemConnect)
Related posts
- What's Bitcoin's Value?
- Why NOT buying Bitcoin is completely irrational
- How to buy Bitcoin in the Eurozone - Comment acheter du Bitcoin dans la zone euro
- The Church of Bitcoin
Blockchain, Crypto and Society
- Game Theory 102 - Blockchain and Cooperative Games
- Why Blockchain Is a Revolution
- A New Hope
- Blockchain revolution: Money and Credit
- The Press needs to be Freed from the Tyranny of Money
- The Holy Blockchain
- Understanding blockchain's social impact
- Blockchain and the End of the Western Civilization
Interesting analysis.
George Gilder calls it the "cryptocosm" in his book "Life After Google".
Yes, we discussed this in Krakow :-)
I happen to like the sound of "cryptoverse" better than that of the synonymous "cryptocosm" :-)
It was Gilder’s book that led me to look beyond bitcoin and investigate the evolving DLT projects like Steem. I’m still wrapping my head around all of the potential beyond using the blockchain as a secure transfer of funds!
There is so much innovation happening on Steem. It’s almost impossible to get your head around all of it!
Posted using Partiko iOS
Sounds like an interesting book
Posted using Partiko Android
126.23$ has been spent to promote this content using Steemium.
Learn more here!
Well written perspectives as I think these times we are headed towards will make these factors even more relevant. I see more as an evolution instead of a revolution!
Posted using Partiko iOS
You got a 81.31% upvote from @promobot courtesy of @steemium!
This vote costed 13.435 STEEM and can be reversed for 2.688 STEEM. If you wish to reverse this vote, click here.
bitcoin will survive every hurdle
let see if it survives the "Transaction and Mempool hurdle"...
How much you earn on a single post man ?😱😱😱
Posted using Partiko Android
It's called "advertising". Not real earnings, don't get your hopes too high :-)
Actually, I pay myself to get visibility. I pay this money to Steemium who optimizes the bots who upvote the post so that it reaches trending and so many people who would otherwise not have seen it, get to see it. ...
Look at the comment from @steemium for more details. The "126.23$ has been spent" ...by myself :-)
To whom are you 'advertising'? People still ignorant enough about rewards and bid bots who bother to look at trending?
An otherwise good post, but yeah, it's not a $200 post in proportion to other posts. That's irrespective of you paying for the upvotes, which really has nothing to do with anyone else on STEEM but you and the bots. Keep telling yourself that it's just advertising, and not a significant reason why STEEM gets a bad rap.
To people who don't know my blog and who might learn something from discovering and reading it. Irrespective of rewards and bid bots, I want my work to be read as widely as possible. And I know no other way to draw attention to my posts.
No, wait, I could "bait" people in other ways, like the "clickbait" ads you see nowadays even on the websites of reputable journals. How do you propose someone to draw attention to his posts ?
There are many ways to look at it.
I've explored this in an older post: How I learned to stop worrying and love the Bid Bots
So in short, the primary argument FOR is that they generate passive income for some purported bid bot 'investor'? How exactly is that supposed to scale?
You'd prefer to 'bait' people using artificially distorted rewards rather than a catchy title, and that occasionally mentioning it down in the comments, somehow that absolves you of creating the fiction to the casual observer, that you somehow earned the $200?
Just like capitalism. You know, the real world.
Someone offers "work" (or "labor") - this is the content creator. Someone else offers "capital" - this is the passive investor.
Labor + capital = prosperity
Except that the steem economy needs diversification. Just "content and attention" (the "blogging business") is not enough.
We now have games too (Steem Monsters - @steemmonsters, Drug Wars @drugwars, Next Colony @nextcolony, etc), but more diversification is needed.
We used to have "open source software" with Utopian but alas, that business folded.
We have Fundition @fundtion for charity management but I'm not sure it's thriving.
I talked for instance about a marketplace for selling art here: Revisiting Steemland: a fairer and more transparent art market as a new "export".
Another idea is a marketplace for selling unused storage space. A bit like filecoin / storj / sia / bittorrent but with the power of the best cryptoeconomic system, that of steem: Steembit: a decentralized storage marketplace for Steemland
There are a bunch of other ideas for diversification, like @oracle-d for instance.
The more diverse the types of work one can source from Steemland (supposedly better quality or cheaper price than elsewhere), the more attractive the ecosystem is for investors.
This isn't an answer, and neither is the subsequent vacuous mess of platitudes you dumped after it.
Hmm ... you don't give me much gripping surface there ... I don't see how to engage further.
Sorry, as I forgot to leave a comment with my downvote.
The comment would have gone like this:
I agree with @joshman as well as with @smooth that in comparison to the content this post is taking a out of proportion share of the rewardpool.
Wonder what's your argument to downvote my latest post, taking away 95% of my rewards ;).
In my opinion capitalist practise is a bit out of place on a self-governed, de-centralized (as much as possible) platform, but hey, everybody is free to do as they like.
And: No thanks for revenge-downvoting.
Why am I not shocked? ...and now the true colors are shown. I guess a few cents was too much reward for you. I healed it in any case.
Thanks @joshman. One meets some nice people while trying to contribute a bit to this platform!
No, that was not it. I explain it above. I disagree with "reward-size" downvoting, I have written at length about it. Please read my reply to @captainklaus above
See also: Spammers gonna spam and especially Steem Social Lab: we need a charter
I have a different view. As I allude to in this post and explain in more detail in others, there is a VERY powerful reason why the world is centralized. Centralization is A LOT more effective and efficient than decentralization.
However centralization has an "Achiles heel" - it is prone to abuse of power.
Decentralized systems have only become workable recently thanks to blockchain.
However that doesn't by miracle make them more competitive than centralized ones.
People in crypto tend to get over enthusiastic about decentralized systems, whereas their main value, at this point at least, is to keep a check on their "big brothers", the centralised ones. To offer some kind of a "fallback" even if an inferior one.
Cue the "exit" paper above.
One problem with decentralized systems is that they create, from a game theoretical pov a very weak, "dog-eats-dog", "might makes right", jungle type of society.
Have you read Thomas Hobbes? The famous "nasty, brutish and short"?
A "decentralized community" where you make your own rules and decide out of your own accord that my work does not deserve whatever it got is the very nightmare Hobbes is describing. In such a "decentralized community" I can also decide, out of my own accord, that your picture is not worth 45 cents.
This can very fast becomes a very destructive spiral of "downvote and retaliation".
I am fundamentally disagreeing with the (admittedly widespread) view exposed by smooth that steemians should use downvotes when they think a post gets "too much rewards". To me, this is basically the death knell of Steemit as a community blogging platform.
Everybody becomes a "reward vigilante" and shoots-from-the-hip according to his/her own perception of what is fair and what is "too much".
Have you (or @smooth for that matter) thought that $5 does not mean the same to someone living in Switzerland as to someone living in Venezuela? Yet Steemit is a global platform... Should Venezuelans downvote $5 posts because for them, $5 means a month of hard work?
Read also R. Axelrod "The evolution of cooperation" - the "revenge downvoting" is called "tit for that" and is proven to be the most effective tactic at building cooperation in a "repeated prisoner dilemma" setting.
Posted using Partiko Android
Great insights there ;)
Back to my question: Why did you actually downvote my recent post?
To make a point: you can't build or keep a community together if each member of it makes his/her own rules, if each member of it uses it's own "yardstick" to measure what's "fair" and "unfair". If you downvote the post of someone you don't know, not because that person violated some commonly-agreed rules of "fairness" but because he violated YOUR own sovereign (to you) / arbitrary (to everyone else) rules then you should accept that the same thing happens to you. You downvoting my post - you cannot be hold accountable for your action. Same holds for everyone then, including me downvoting your post. Do you see a problem with this ? I do. This leads directly to either the dissolution of the community or to the worst form of organization, the "wolf pack".
Do not downvote unless enforcing clearly stated and commonly agreed rules. Better still if you are a community-designated rule enforcer ("reward police").
As long as there no agreed rules do not downvote of your own accord.
Posted using Partiko Android
Another one thinking there is a police. Reward police is quite an idea.
Go and read the Bluepaper.
Also check out bid bot abuse and revenge voting @steemflagrewards
There is no police. There are no clear "laws". There is no legitimate authority and no accountability. I don't think there should be a reward police. You seem to feel the need for one because you take it upon yourself to police rewards.
What I'm saying (and frankly, I'm just echo-ing Hobbes) is that for as long as there are no commonly agreed rules, it is a very bad idea for each participant to make its own arbitrary rules and start behaving as "the law" or as "the police" - as you did when you downvoted my post.
I have read both the blue paper and the whitepaper which I quote in some of my older posts. I believe there are some good ideas (no transaction fees, a novelty at the time) and some very bad ideas ("even spam is work" - page 15 of the whitepaper)
Posted using Partiko Android
I did not intend to "dump a vacuous mess of platitudes". My intention was to talk economy. "Labour + capital = prosperity" is a literary shorthand for a basic macro-economic law (added value).
If I had written instead "mass * velocity = momentum" you probably would not have taken that to be a "vacuous mess of platitudes".
So perhaps the discipline of economics is for you a "vacuous mess of platitudes". Could that be the case ? Perhaps you just don't know enough about economics and it all looks Chinese (or Greek) to you ?
I specifically asked how you expect the bidbot investment thesis would scale. You continue to patronize me with your responses.
What is exactly your concern about "scaling", what do you feel is not scalable, can you elaborate ?
"Scale" in what sense ? Technical ? Or economical ?
If the former, I would need you to clarify your concern because I don't see what is the scalability issue you are concerned about.
If the latter, I think the "bidbot investment" does not NEED to scale - this is what I was referring to when talking about diversification. The "bidbot investment" will stabilize to an equilibrium level that will be reached through market mechanics.
As an illustration, the early bidbots (booster for instance) were distributing 80 - 85% of the bids. Some people saw the opportunity and started offering bidbots that pledged to return 100% of the value of the bids (the rising).
Then even more aggressive offers appeared, such as spydo and tipu which also return (under different form) a part of the curation rewards.
For as long as there is demand for bidbot services, and that demand outstrips supply, there will be people ready to offer those services. If running a bidbot becomes more expensive than the earnings, the operators will need to reduce the payout to investors. If on the other hand the people buying bidbot services would feel that they don't provide enough value for the risk, they will reduce the sums used for bidding (potentially down to zero)
It's a free market (for attention) at work, and it works pretty well.
However, it is fragile - it depends on the aggregate number of eyeballs which the content can reach. This is why steem needs a wider array of services on offer, thus allowing investors to redirect their "steem power" capital to the most profitable opportunity.
I see your point. However their profitability and supply can also be heavily influenced by downvoting. If I only look at a post in terms of proportion of rewards, the case for downvoting is easy.
The community is under no obligation to acknowledge the back-end transaction that facilitated the disproportion. The tenor of the argument I have seen so far, is that for some reason the onlooker should be obligated to consider that transaction when evaluating whether a post has been over-rewarded. The implication is that these bots are 'here to stay' and are a persistent 'feature of STEEM'. I don't subscribe to that at all.
I hope better places emerge to sink STEEM, and I hope the concept of bid bots will wither away and die. Either way I don't intend to facilitate their existence by participating, short of returning excessive rewards back to the pool. There are more than enough targets for my eyeballs that don't use them worthy of those rewards.
One important question to ask is: who, and on what basis decides whether a post is "over- rewarded" ?
Take a look at steemworld.org. You see that for this post, the "author payout" is ~131.82USD
Now if you look at the Steemium comment under this post, it says:
"126.23$ has been spent to promote this content using Steemium."
That makes a net payout to the author (me) of about 5 USD
Do you consider that to be "over rewarded" ?
On what basis, how do you reckon my post (implicitly, the time spent to research and write it) should be valued ?
The fact you paid someone to upvote you is not my concern, nor am I obligated to consider the profitability of your private transaction when viewing its rewards taken from the pool in proportion to similar posts. I feel like we are going around in circles now. The fact I don't want to wade through bought and paid for shit while searching for organically curated content reflects in my actions of returning proportionality of rewards through downvoting as the actual blockchain was designed.
Posted using Partiko Android
That is "zero sum thinking".
Please allow me to invite you to reconsider the implicit idea you seem to harbor about yourself that you understand how economy works.
Do you have a reason that makes you believe you can argue economy? I mean, there's no shame in not being very proficient in all the areas, you are certainly a very good network and security consultant but would you say you are as good in networking as in, say, law ? Unlikely. What about economics ? Just as unlikely I dare say.
The "reward pool" is an illusion. The "Steem" token doesn't have implicit value. The value is harnessed at the interface with the rest of the world, with the fiat based economy.
Looking at the the proportionality of rewards (denominated in steem) between different posts is akin to trying to learn how to ride a bicycle by focusing intently on the circular movement of a spinning wheel (rather than getting in the saddle and pedaling) ...
How would you laugh at me if I came to you and I started arguing some "too clever by half" stuff in the networking domain like, for instance "that network is on /22 and it should be on /24" or something I'm actually quite incompetent at?
You get too worked up about stuff you think it's straightforward and you understand. Believe, me, there is a real discipline called "economics", no one is born proficient into it.
Sorry I don't mean to offend you but you look at too narrow a picture, at the wrong indicators
Oh look, you're patronizing me again. We are done.
5 minutes on LinkedIn, turns out you aren't an economist either, but another IT guy. Who would have thought? Hypocrite.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/sorincristescu/
In some cases I am willing to forgo that downvote with a discussion when I feel the situation warrants it as in this particular instance.
Posted using Partiko Android
Here's just one partial illustration to my argument about focusing on the wrong indicators (the fairness of sharing a worthless cake called "the reward pool").
Does our discussion have value ? I reckon it has - it allows me to learn about you, to hear and think through your arguments and come up with some answers (for what they are worth). It allows you to do something similar. We both learn something.
Well, if I had not used the bidbots to reach trending, this valuable conversation would simply not have happened. We would have not generated the associated value.
The steem in the reward pool is an illusion to get people to interact with each other and produce valuable content and learn. There lays the real value, all the rest is just illusion. In that sense, the bid bots, associated to the "trneding", are a good mechanism.
That being said, taking a step back, I think ranking posts in "trending" by the payout is a really bad idea. Post quality should not be assessed by how much rewards they gather. But I can't change that. Since I have to live with it, then the real goal is to generate valuable interactions within the rules of the game.
In other words, it's not the bidbots that are bad, is the "payout means quality" implicit logic of "trending" which is the original bad idea.
That's why you have downvotes
Not sure you are reading his comment like I do. My interpretation is: "how do you manage that, I'd like to know how to earn that much myself!"
Posted using Partiko Android
Possible!
Note the comment from Steemium below: it says I've spent $126.23 in "advertising" this post through the bidbots. Now if you look for instance in steemworld.org you can see that "author payout" for this post, at the time of me writing this comment, is $131.63.
That means this post earns an equivalent of $5 in SBD and SP, in case I cash out, which I never do.
Yeah, it kinda' takes out the magic, right ? It's about the content, not about the money.
Amazing write-up. The world has not been able to comprehend the idea behind bitcoin. Bitcoin is the solution to all financial problem across the world.
Hi @sorin.cristescu!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 6.242 which ranks you at #246 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has dropped 1 places in the last three days (old rank 245).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 136 contributions, your post is ranked at #18.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server
grt
Congratulations @sorin.cristescu! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
.
Nice article! I am investing in Bitcoin for long term. May be for 30 or 40 years. I am not sure how much it will be in future. But I am not selling and will hold Bitcoin along with other coins for long term. We take risk with all sort of investment including business so why not Bitcoin or Crypto. I think in next 20 years block chain and crypto currency will rule the world.
I hope you're right
The funny thing about bitcoin being called a ponzi, to me, is that there used to be (not sure if there still are) many many different ways to get free bitcoin. lol. There were faucets and ad campaigns and such that you could take advantage of and get "free" (Doing a task isn't technically free... lol) bitcoin in the process.
What ponzi have you ever heard of, that gave you free entry? And then allow you to keep getting money free? With no investment? :P
I haven't heard of any, at least.
Also, bitcoin made no promises to anyone! Bitcoin itself never said "I'll make you tons of money! Just buy X amount of me!" Our beloved Bitcoin has never asked anything of any of us. Except for us to love it. lol
People relish intellectual comfort. Thinking is the most energy-expensive task we can do, so many people have devised mechanisms to allow them to save (scrimp) on thinking. Labeling something as, for instance a "Ponzi scheme" without looking closer allows one to "safely" avoid thinking ...
Good analysis, some people still see bitcoin as a ponzi scheme but they didn't know what is behind that!
Great insight. Bitcoin is a pure escape from the deterioration of a centralized and greed infected society. It will not be just an exit but a mass exodus. Cheers
Congratulations @sorin.cristescu!
Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:
"Ponzi scheme" People never change, they just didn't know how powerful is blockchain technology! The time will come for sure!
The bitcoins is a future!
Wow, very nice analysis and very good conclusion!!
all i read was "exit to voice" lol
i heard ned ius telling steem devs to leave to eos
maybe ned will make a steem airdropped voice alternative with his money hes makin sellin steem LOL
its fine we are better without ned, but we can beat ned ewto it, aggroed can put Steemp from steem engine onto eos, and we can have a steem sbale coin on eos that stays 1:1 to steem price, that way we can be connected to eos, and have a steem token on newdex. steem engine too can be an eosio token traded listed for free on newdex
inter blockchain communication
Obviously, BTC is not a scheme and it does have value. But does it have a future? It is based on outdated technology and its volatility won't let it grow outside the crypto enthusiasts community. Besides, the total lack of regulation may not be a pro for the currency in the long run.
fair questions ... time will tell ..
Thank you for posting this. I need more people like you in my life.
I totally agree with your view except it's not just the "dictatorship of fiat money", it's something bigger: the dictatorship of the social stack.
I'm curious to know what you think about what I'm writing.
https://staging.busy.org/@damonvoks/the-social-stack
https://staging.busy.org/@damonvoks/social-stack-part-2
I've read the first one, I can't say I disagree with your analysis but the real question is: what's to do about it?
I don't think society can be changed. It does change by itself, it evolves, more or less at its own pace. while it evolves, how are the individual destinies ? In the past, when people felt trapped in one of the "layers" of the stack, it ended up with a bloody revolution. For as long as there's some social mobility and "hopeless ants" can strive (and sometimes succeed) to become ants, ants to become super-ants and so on, we should all be more-or-less fine. Overall, the human condition has greatly improved over the course of history. Can we do better ? Possibly. Can we do worse ? Oh yeah, that's for sure, we have already botched a couple times ! So given risk and benefit, perhaps the social stack is not great but about as good as we are able to do ...
Bitcoin and crypto news read at https://btcmanager.com/
Join telegram https://t.me/btcmanagernews
なぜこれを読んだのか分かりませんが、学んだことはたくさんありました。
One big factor on bitcoin's side is time, as fiat currency is continued to be printed it becomes more diluted.
It's only a matter of time before inflation takes permanent hold. Look at negative bond rates in Europe if you want evidence.
Bitcoin will become digital gold as more people realise that it is a hedge/protection against inflation and the current fiat-based monetary structures.
Congratulations @sorin.cristescu! You received a personal award!
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
Best crypto news read at https://btcmanager.com
Join telegram https://t.me/btcmanagernews
Well said! !ENGAGE 100 und lieben Gruß Kadna
There has already been too much
ENGAGEtoday.To view or trade
ENGAGEgo to steem-engine.com.hi @sorin.cristescu
didn't hear from you in a long while. Hope you're still okey there and just taking a break from Steemit?
Yours
Piotr
hi @crypto.piotr
nice to see someone noticing ! :-)
I took a long holiday. Back now but I have lots of things on my plate and probably won't be very active on steemit in the near future. I also need to understand how HF21 works ...
How about you ?
Hi @sorin.cristescu
I've pen and paper and I note names of people I like, I value or I consider them solid content creators. And I visit profiles of each one of them any time I can.
You're on that list :)
Hope you had a good holiday.
Would you perhaps consider "renting out" some of your SP if you're planning to be away? I would gladly share all weekly rewards I would be receiving from my manual curration.
(example: if I would receive 50SP weekly for curations, and you would delegate 10k to me then it would be exacly 28% of my total SP. So at the end of the week I would transfer to you 14 STEEM).
This way you would be having some FAIR extra weekly paycheck and I would be able to support some of my followers, which I value a lot.
My discord: crypto.piotr#3426
Telegam: crypto_piotr
email: [email protected]
Hope to hear from you,
Piotr