Why Blurt

This post is a response to several questions I've gotten recently from users I know from Hive who are tired of being targeted with down votes. Targeted because they don't publish the approved propaganda, punished for not being part of the false "woke" cult that rejects any critical analyses that would threaten the illusionary constructs of those in charge.

My first examination will be on the founders of Blurt, Jacob Gadikian and Ricardo Ferreira. My apologies in advance that I have more knowledge of Jacob from my initial research before joining.

Jacob Gadikian

Some back story.

It was during my power down at Hive that I stumbled across a comment about Blurt from Mr. Cornell. His accounts active on all three chains as he pays a team to curate accounts that most times would go unnoticed.

I was fed up with the insulting and down voting. While I was largely untouched when it came to being down voted, so many in my circles were down voted. Often it wouldn't be uncommon for the most vulgar of comments to be left on my posts in response to one of the targeted folks by the bully whale. I was threatened several times myself for the crime of interacting with these folks, and reblogging some of their posts. Surprisingly despite the threats not much came of them directly.

However, watching those you grow to appreciate constantly attacked, both monetarily and verbally begins to eat at one. Watching these folks sometimes have meltdowns. Some leaving, some threatening to leave but instead they stay and allow the negativity to grow, all the while strengthening the very oppressive system by providing entertainment and value.

I even had one person I had thought I was close to down vote me and tell me to f*** off when I asked why not just leave if they were getting to him so bad, that it wasn't worth all that. Some time later he saw me in a comment section and attacked my comment, to which I replied wasn't it time for him to quit again (he threatens to quit again and again).

I use him as an example to show how dis-eased these negative situations can become extreme. That there is simply no reason to cultivate this as the crops it produces are bad, aberrations from anything that is healthy.

Anyways, I had a post down voted by the probable real wealth behind Steem/Hive, the NextGen account. It was a post where the rewards were set to to a community member who needed funds for a lawyer to keep his niece out of the foster care system. Monetarily, it didn't impact me at all. But it was the last straw for me. To target a post that was designed to keep a little girl safe with family was it.

So I decided to walk away. I began my power down of almost 5000 Hive, quietly. No rage quit posts, I didn't talk about leaving. I curated until it was no longer worth voting.

Towards the end of that power down, I saw Mr. Cornell talking about Blurt on someone elses post. I didn't know who he was at the time, but his comment intrigued me.

So despite knowing I was done with DPOS and the designed flaw of stake negation via vote theft, I began looking into it. Enter Jacob Gadikian. I apologize now I can't provide links to the many things I discovered while I waited out the rest of the year to join Blurt for tax reasons. But this is what I discovered.

He talked about a community the way someone who actually values a community would talk about it.

Examples.

He talked of helping others set up front ends/new chains, helping others set up witness nodes on a Raspberry. For the new chains, his demand would be an airdrop for current Blurt users. I tried really hard to find this over the last day and can't, so I lean towards with his movement forward this might no longer be on the table.

He talked of ongoing new projects, with airdrops for all Blurt stake holders. Unlike the Dan Larimer model, where one is expected to buy in with each new project if they wish to be part of the new community, Jacob wants us all to transition to new territory together as a community. No need to keep paying again to be where his focus is like Larimer.

Unlike the other chains, he actually has a blog he uses, and when he wishes to make a change he uses that blog. He asks for community input, unlike Steem/Hive where once one of the powerful mention something you know whats coming next.

I could say more on the man, but will post several links in a moment for you to go make an assessment.

I wish to now point out walking the talk.

Jacob does a lot of work in the Cosmos system, and alongside his promised upcoming chain called Splash that will see a drop coming for Blurt users, he also works with a chain he helped develop called Dig. It's involved in real estate, and all Blurt users will be getting some form of airdrop into it. I believe the snapshot for that might have already been taken.

The Splash chain will operate on the Cosmos chain, and we are going to see much integration with the Cosmos system over the coming year. None of which will stop the Blurt chain from continuing on the graphene system. Jacob had misgivings it appeared on continuing to use this system, but due to community sentiment has made a pledge to keep Blurt going as we build new systems. I laugh at my use of we just now, because it's really him and a few others building this stuff, we are the beneficiaries who are there to use and support this. A community.

Anyway, here are some links for those interested.

https://vn.linkedin.com/in/jacobgadikian

https://blurt.blog/@jacobgadikian

https://blurt.blog/blurt/@jacobgadikian/free-transactions-kill-the-blockchain-organism-slowly

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5284933.0

https://blurt.blog/blurt/@jacobgadikian/why-fees-are-a-good-idea

https://blurt.blog/blurt/@jacobgadikian/200k-club comment

https://blurt.blog/democracy/@jacobgadikian/meme-time

https://blurt.blog/blurt/@jacobgadikian/blurt-has-no-dollar-stablecoin-why

https://github.com/faddat

https://digchain.org/

There are a couple of links above where he discusses fees, which was another observation made by one of those looking around here right now. I welcome any discussion on the fees in my comments by anyone who has misgivings on them.

In closing on Jacob, I want to stress something important. Unlike Steem, and then Hive, there are no deep pockets behind this project. There was so much money behind those two projects that a large part of the price likely involves much wash trading. Something behind most all of crypto really. Give the illusion of value and then others enter, opening their wallets. FOMO.

Jacob funded all of this initially, and continues to fund a lot of thew activity as he waits for the community to grow. He walks the talk.

Ricardo Ferreira

I honestly don't know that much about Ricardo. In my initial investigation into Blurt, almost everything involving Blurt either came from or was about Jacob.

Here is what I do know.

I never used it, but many who used the Discord praised his Ginabot. He was responsible for that, so if you used it he was the one you should thank.

Here is a link to know more about him.

https://buildteam.io/

I don't have the links available for what I'm about to share, but if you have the time and inclination to go to LordButterfly hive posts you can find it.

Evidently he had a project that was to help stabilize the backed dollar on the other chains. In some of the many critical posts about Blurt, there were several made about his being a fraud, why was he holding the funds if he was no longer involved at Hive etc. I apologize that I don't know more about these funds, just this part of it.

So after much borderline slandering against Ricardo, the LordButterfly person reached out to him and asked if he would turn them over. Which he promptly did. Imagine that, instead of slandering someone actually decided to just ask about their return, and they were. Turns out all that conjecture of thief was completely unfounded. Which again highlights how quickly the mob at the other chain will go after those they view as a threat or not part of the approved clique.

More importantly, it demonstrates the character of Ricardo. One didn't see defensiveness, didn't see an engagement on the slander. He was asked and promptly returned what was a not inconsiderable amount of coin.

I wish to make an even more personal observation from my experience as well.

I'm not a fan of some of the things he wants or promotes. I've been vocal about it as well. The largest one being his vision for an instagram type community here at Blurt. Despite my pulling no punches in my feelings on it, he didn't take it personally. Not only didn't he not take it personally, he even up voted a post where I talked of a use for it while denigrating it at the same time. You can see this for yourself here.

https://blurt.blog/blurt/@practicalthought/understanding-what-s-in-front-of-you-blurt-is-a-tool

I think we all know what happens at Hive or Steem if one speaks against the power structure. Can we say account destroyed anyone? Here, it was actually even up voted because he was mature enough to not take my assessment as a personal attack on him, which it wasn't. He is able to separate opinion from fact and reward fact even when the opinion isn't flattering.

This is a demonstration on why two such as Jacob and Ricardo became partners. A clear demonstration of water rising to its own level.

Personal Thoughts

I've said many times the real value of a social blockchain will be the community. We saw proof of this when Hive was created, and the sunken cost fallacy came into play. Many preferring their known tyrants to the incoming unknown one. Able to use the vast fortune they made from their structure at Steem, coupled with that Binance listing that I now wonder wasn't already agreed upon before the theater of hostile takeover began, it ensured the continued illusion of value.

However, if most would have rejected the tyrants and their stake theft system and opted for Blurt, much would have been revealed on where the real value is.

Nine months ago I returned to Hive to make a post about claiming your Blurt account to take part in the upcoming drops. To my surprise, one I was always close to at Steem/Hive (Krnel) made a couple of jabs at Blurt.

https://hive.blog/crypto/@practicalthought/psa-you-probably-have-blurt-coins-airdropped-to-you-and-you-need-to-claim-them-asap

I notice however that due to a down voting campaign against him, he has not posted in 5 months there now, and has powered down his large stake there.

https://hive.blog/@krnel/posts

His was one of the top rewarded blogs on this social blockchain experiment. Yet he has been chased off multiple times for being to successful, which is code for it is not approved how certain stakeholders allocate their claim to the reward pool, we will now shift those rewards to those more deserving. Ourselves and our large pull from that pool.

Sunk cost fallacy is a hard obstacle for most, seemingly unconquerable. But of one thing you can be assured. THEY aren't going to change. If anything is going to change there to survive, IT WILL BE YOU. So push aside that feeling of loss, push aside the illusion of what never was and never will be. Any community there is an illusion, able to be destroyed at will by the tyrants. Just look at the side token communities to see the truth in this. Just let it end.

I also recently saw a comment on the persons account at Hive who was inquisitive of the founders. It was a denigrating comment regarding the value of Blurt.

https://hive.blog/hive-167922/@whatsup/re-lucylin-r0x2m4

The New Bernie Sanders of Hive has this to say.

It is very much alive for spammers, what is where we want them to go :)

Then the other person said this to add onto the negative spin.

Well, I just took a curiosity peek, mostly just at the price, I guess it depends how you define rich. :)

I notice one thing in common. Insults (as though Hive doesn't have a ton of spam) and a denigration on the monetary value.

I can't reiterate enough that the monetary value is derived from the investing taking place. If those who are targeted for wrong think were to power down their Hive, it would erode the valuation of Hive or at the least require a lot more purchasing from the power elite there to maintain the illusion of value. The flip side is if that was shifted to Blurt, where one can't be censored/censured or have stake vote allocation stolen the monetary value would rise to reflect that growing demand.

I'm the value. You're the value. Here at Blurt a real chance at being free to speak your truth exists. For those who value such things, they should come and as they come and more follow, the monetary value will begin reflecting the value we put into it. At Steem and Hive, they falsely created an appearance of financial value and used that to attract investors. At Blurt, one is offered freedom as the initial value, and if we agree we are valuable, we will invest monetarily accordingly. A true free market, we don't have that illusion the tyrants created at the other sites.

It was said to me that the fees for activity here could discourage activity. I would say that there are posts above I shared from Jacob discussing this. But in addition to that I also want to point out that so far, many users here are from countries where a few dollars a day is a lot of money. Yet they manage these fees every day. It acts as a buffer against the spam that was mentioned above by one of the tyrants of Hive.

This chain was attacked right before I joined by NextGen, spamming his fascination with male genitalia using a loophole he found. I remember all to well his love for those type of pictures, having seen them so many times in my comment sections when the target of his wrath would comment there.

So the answer is, if someone wants to spam. Then pay for it.

I can say from personal experience that the bulk of my activity here is commenting, and I probably get more vote rewards from my comments than some of the low effort blogs do weekly, a lot more.

I wasn't sure myself on the fees when I first came here, but see for those who are actively engaged here, they are a small drop in the bucket compared to the returns. I've grown to appreciate them more than the resource credit scam they have going on at the other chains, their hopes to turn those into a rent seeking opportunity if they can ever get demand high enough. Which they won't, they make sure to chase off those who do to well. They really do want to be large fish in a small pond.

You have value, I have value. Together we can decide to form communities. Here at Blurt there is a free landscape allowing us to speak our hearts, even if many passing by disagree. You can't be stolen from for disagreeing, and the pond here can become an ocean if enough of us decide to come here. They can't chase us off as they insist it will ever be little more than a small pond they own.

This post is starting to grow lengthy, so will end this very incomplete picture of Blurt for now. I welcome any questions in the comments however, and will do my best to answer them or find someone who can if you have any.

Edit: I'm editing this post to include a link to the following post. It is from another user describing how they view Blurt as different. I would urge those with questions to also read this post as it sums up exactly why we are what brings the value to social blockchain.

https://blurt.blog/blurt/@elkezaksek/blurt-there-is-feeling