"You use words which simply only recognize a single benefit. What other benefit is implied in your statement?"

I was highlighting the fact that the most obvious benefit of becoming a large stakeholder, is the ability to allocate a higher percentage of the rewards pool based mathematically on the percentage that you have powered up. There are other benefits too. However, they are far less tangible and harder to sell people on.

"You imply that Steem's use case has no value, and it only has value, as do other altcoins, due to it's being a cryptocurrency like BTC."

Steem has other value, and it's derived by its ability to mine people for creative content by exploiting human psychology as clearly indicated in the whitepaper. All stakeholders are benefiting from this. I'm not sure that's any more or less moral than those stakeholders who self-vote shit posts after they've realized what steem is doing and one's actual chances of receiving something of equal value in exchange for the time and energy invested.

OK. Try to sleep on a park bench in NY. The cops will beat you until you go away. Until the SJW shilling began this century in earnest, that was the common solution to homelessness. Also, you just moved the goalposts. I was addressing the necessity of sticks, not advocating a particular implementation of social policy. I then go on to point out that nature deploys sticks that discourage dysfunction, such as dysentery. Are you going to argue that nature is unjust?

Your reply isn't even an argument against my point. You just move the goalposts.

Perhaps I misinterpreted what you were conveying. You can't argue with nature, as it's not an entity with a mind or the capability to reason. However, when it comes to your analogy about people who assault the homeless, there is a simple way of dealing with those kinds of people. It's the same way you deal with someone who tries to mug you.

"You simply ignore everything I said and assume Steem only has value because it's a cryptocurrency like BTC. This is not an argument. It's moving the goalposts."

I'll repeat the same answer as before: Steem has other value, and it's derived by its ability to mine people for creative content by exploiting human psychology as clearly indicated in the whitepaper. All stakeholders are benefiting from this. I'm not sure that's any more or less moral than those stakeholders who self-vote shit posts after they've realized what steem is doing and one's actual chances of receiving something of equal value in exchange for the time and energy invested.

"Again, you're ignoring that self voting decreases the value of the token. That's neither good nor evil, it just is the effect self voting has."

I think we may have a fundamental difference in our perception of how the system works. I may be wrong, but as far as I know, the rewards pool inflation is calculated by the number of tokens that exist on the network. The only way to get them off the network is to burn them to null. So if you are a whale and you do a quality post, and you don't self vote it; you're not inhibiting inflation, you're merely not rewarding yourself. Someone else will get those rewards.

"You then state I have no self esteem or pride in my content. That's bullshit, and I reckon you need to take it back to restore my assumption of your integrity. You keep ignoring my points, because you don't want them to be true and drive you to agree with my conclusions. You will not arrive at a rational position by doing this. You may maintain your delusions by rejecting these facts, but that will not enable Steem to rise in value due to rational policy being implemented. It will enable you to be increasingly bitter as you cling to your delusions while Steem remains worthless."

I think you have a misperception that your vote causes inflation. As far as I understand it, this is not true. Inflation is determined by the network supply, which was determined long ago. It only shrinks when people burn to null, otherwise, it's growing at a controlled rate. We don't have a very good sink. If you're not voting for yourself because you think you are inflating the currency when you do vote, then I can almost see why you're not self-voting as an investor. However, you are also a content creator, so if the self vote caused inflation as you seem to believe, you have just as much right to reap rewards as any other content creator. Also, I think you might be personalizing what I said, either that or I made a gross generalization. There are many areas in life where people can demonstrate that they have self-esteem. When it comes to the realm of content creation if you do a quality post and you know it then one way to demonstrate self-esteem is to upvote your content.

"No. You seem not to have experience investing. Capital gains is THE incentive that has driven civilization since prehistory. Profiteering, which includes violent raids by savages BTW, has continually been a drag on development. You seem not to grasp the opposite impact of these dissimilar practices, which I have repeatedly tried to explain, provided examples of, and I believe it's due to your continual undertaking to ignore what you do not want to hear.

The difference in skill between investors determines their relative success. The difference between investors and profiteers determines whether society benefits as a whole from their efforts. This is a fundamental principle and underlies all other aspects of civilization.

Experienced investors understand this principle, and thus are competent to contribute. Do you grasp the difference between corporate raiders and competent execution of a business plan that increases revenue from producing goods and services in terms of social impact? I haven't seen any sign that you do, and you always ignore this point. I haven't once mentioned morality or ethics. I point out the different impact of different practices, and leave the temporizing to you. Nonetheless you project on to me your conclusions of morality that you assign to the different effects I explain result from different actions.

Don't project that on me. That's all you. Since you dislike evil, and you account destruction of the value of Steem evil, you ignore evidence of the destruction the policies you support cause and accuse me of moralizing. That's not only disingenuous, it's dysfunctional. Stahp."

To the best of my knowledge, the rewards are a predetermined and foregone conclusion, aside from the very tiny amount that is getting burned to null. If you as a stakeholder invested in a slice of the pie, which will all be given away at the end of the day or week, then that's your prerogative. The act of altruism or self-sacrifice is not preventing inflation, not one iota. It only ensures that other people get those rewards.

"First, I do tell them this. Second, the Huey Long algorithm removes the financial incentive to do this, so it is trivial to stop it. Lastly, I have repeatedly pointed out that Steem does not attract investors because Steem is a bad investment, based on profiteering which investors intent on capital gains know is destructive of value. What we get instead are profiteers, who do not invest for capital gains, but to strip the value from the system into their own wallets.

You make this latter statement because you continually ignore the difference between profiteers and investors. The former destroy, and the latter builds. Builders aren't going to sink money in a platform controlled by profiteers. No one takes a long term stake in companies raided by Bain Capital Partners because it is obviously just stoopid to do. That is exactly the reason almost no one invests in Steem - except profiteers, and for profiteering purposes."

Does my assertion self-voting does not create inflation change your position on this?

"Steem is a broken bucket that the crabs successfully flee en masse."

This might not necessarily be a bad thing considering some of the discoveries I made in the white and blue paper. And it depends on which you identify with more, the person who is going to eat the crab meat or the crab himself. We're all a little bit of both, some more than others.

Here is how inflation will work regardless of self-sacrifice. The only thing that influences these numbers is burning to null and it's effects are slim to nill.