Now this is an interesting response from the creator of @burnpost

n reality there are numerous active arbitrage bots which trade between the internal and external markets. In fact it does not matter which market is used to buy SBD, because any demand pressure added to one market will be transmitted to the others via arbitrage.

This is an argument that is always brought up when there is a talk about internal vs external market. Personally i don't know wich accounts are using these arbitrage bots, so i can't talk about how effective they are.

Now, the interesting about arbitrage bots is that, interestingly, the market price don't matter. The only thing that matter is the difference of price between one market and another.

So, if a difference is created between internal and external market (external buy price is lower than the internal sell price) it is not interesting to make a trade big enought to move the price. If the arbitage operation did that, it would make it harder for another opportunity to arise on the other direction.

So i don't think these arbitrage bots actually have any real effect on the price.

I could change my mind if i saw one of them operating, so, you know any i could see working?

nother misunderstanding is the nature of @burnpost. @burnpost does not under current conditions, take existing STEEM and destroy it, it takes newly created STEEM and destroys it instead of selling it.

I agree with that, and i admit i got this part wrong. @burnpost deosn't actively reduce the STEEM supply, but that means a small correction on what i said on the article:

@sbdpotato is decreasing the debt ratio
@burnpost is slowing down the rate at wich the debt ratio decrese

@burnpost decrease the amount of STEEM entering the system, wich reduce the rate the STEEM supply increase, wich slow down the speed of the debt ratio decrease.

In the end, it's the same effect.

In short, the author of this post has a very, very poor understanding of economics, how stable-value cryptocurrencies work (there are numerous errors in that part too, which I have chosen not to take the time to address here) and is trying to profit by writing long, elaborate posts which could be helpful if accurate, but in fact are just misleading people and causing harm. It will be for that reason that I will be downvoting these posts.

Now this part is interesting... so instead of presenting counter-arguments about my arguments you go for a ad hominen argument (saying that i have a poor economics understanding and implying that i have a malicious intent with this article), and threathening to downvote the post?

So, tell me, how am i "misleading people and causing harm" when i am bringing up to light a discussion about a subject that is affecting the blockchain and the Steem community? That is an interesting logic you are going here, and i would like to know more about it...

Btw, i am upvoting your comment, not downvoting it, because what i want here is that this discussion happens beyond the "OMG Stemm is Awesom!moon Soon! They say they are help steem, so i will blindly believe in them!!!"