RE: Steem Consensus Witness Statement: Code Updated

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Steem Consensus Witness Statement: Code Updated

marki99 in #steem • 5 years ago (edited)

Your argument makes no sense because no one said the ninja mine is okay. When it is sold, then the bad action has been done. Ninja mine for profit = bad.

But the person who bought the stake is not responsible for the actions of the previous holder of that stake.

If I sold you 1000 Steem and was abusing my stake, upvoting myself 10 times a day, does that mean that you should now be downvoted by spam preventers?

And to answer your car example, if the car was sold illegally, then yes, it still belongs to the original owner. However, if the transaction was completely legal, then it belongs to the buyer. Other problems are not his to deal with.

Tron acquired their stake fairly.

5 years ago in #steem by marki99

0.00 BPC

Sort:

Trending

[-]

smooth 5 years ago (edited)

You're mistaken about how stolen property works, though that analogy is so strained as to be entirely irrelevant here.

But as a matter of trivia (and so you are better informed), in fact if property is stolen then even a 'legitimate' buyer has to give it back to the rightful owner and then get a refund from the seller.

0.00 BPC

2 votes

[-]

lordbutterfly 5 years ago

What Netouso said is 100% correct. You even have laws in place for this exact thing.
The person who bought the stake doesnt get to keep the stake no string attached. If he has a problem, Ned is the person he should get reparations from..

0.00 BPC

1 vote

[-]

jaguar.force 5 years ago

You have a very strange definition of fairness, and that stake came with strings attached, it swapping hands makes no difference, the strings are still attached.

0.00 BPC