Coindesk Poll - Most Influential

[infovortice2013]

tito Dan Larimer voted   +5% :D

[sumantso]

--- bump ---

[hadrian]

Daniel Larimer

[pseudoscops]

Bump! Make sure you vote if you haven't already.

[jamesc]

Submitted Daniel Larimer!

[House]

Daniel Larimer 8)

[pseudoscops]

This is important!

Vote if you haven't done so already  8)

[hpenvy]

This is what I pasted, Daniel Larimer

+5% Let's keep it moving.

[joele]

This is what I pasted, Daniel Larimer

[fuzzy]

It's a broken poll. No resistance to Sybil attacks and targeted marketing. Vanity elections yield vanity results.

I wasn't trying to make a statement when I posted the poll, I'm just looking for small marketing opportunities that are easy to perform to add to the massive push on Nullstreet.  Takes a few seconds, if people choose to opt out that's fine.

I think the assessment it correct, but it also doesnt matter.  We could call the ethereum marketing strategy a "vanity" marketing strategy as there is little of substance accept for a bunch of interviews about the philosophy.

Charles. Your input is appreciated, but can you maybe start occasionally being positive here?

[hpenvy]

It's a broken poll. No resistance to Sybil attacks and targeted marketing. Vanity elections yield vanity results.

I wasn't trying to make a statement when I posted the poll, I'm just looking for small marketing opportunities that are easy to perform to add to the massive push on Nullstreet.  Takes a few seconds, if people choose to opt out that's fine.

[charleshoskinson]

It's a broken poll. No resistance to Sybil attacks and targeted marketing. Vanity elections yield vanity results.

[WildWex]

Daniel Larimer +5% and then some!

[bytemaster]

"My personal opinion is that you should never vote in a system that is rigged/unprovable on the principle that your "vote" may or may not actually be counted but your participation is certainly counted on to give the result legitimacy."- can't remember who said this, but it applies here.

:) I agree that this is exactly the case...  +5%

Well in this particular case you cannot even gauge the participation.

The gauge of participation in any election can only be determined after the votes are cast and quantified.

Unless you use VOTE in which case you have continuous gauge of rate of voting.

[NewMine]

"My personal opinion is that you should never vote in a system that is rigged/unprovable on the principle that your "vote" may or may not actually be counted but your participation is certainly counted on to give the result legitimacy."- can't remember who said this, but it applies here.

:) I agree that this is exactly the case...  +5%

Well in this particular case you cannot even gauge the participation.

The gauge of participation in any election can only be determined after the votes are cast and quantified.

[James212]

Daniel Larimer all the way   +5%

[Gentso1]

"My personal opinion is that you should never vote in a system that is rigged/unprovable on the principle that your "vote" may or may not actually be counted but your participation is certainly counted on to give the result legitimacy."- can't remember who said this, but it applies here.

free marketing.......voted

[bytemaster]

"My personal opinion is that you should never vote in a system that is rigged/unprovable on the principle that your "vote" may or may not actually be counted but your participation is certainly counted on to give the result legitimacy."- can't remember who said this, but it applies here.

:) I agree that this is exactly the case...  +5%

Well in this particular case you cannot even gauge the participation.   

[hrossik]

"My personal opinion is that you should never vote in a system that is rigged/unprovable on the principle that your "vote" may or may not actually be counted but your participation is certainly counted on to give the result legitimacy."- can't remember who said this, but it applies here.

:) I agree that this is exactly the case...  +5%

[bluebit]

 +5%

[NewMine]

"My personal opinion is that you should never vote in a system that is rigged/unprovable on the principle that your "vote" may or may not actually be counted but your participation is certainly counted on to give the result legitimacy."- can't remember who said this, but it applies here.

[pseudoscops]

Voted

[donkeypong]

Me too.

[fuzzy]

Voted for Dan Larimer.   +5%

[testz]

Voted  :)

[matt608]

Done, this is much more useful than the POH awareds, a coindesk article on the winner would have some weight.

[onceuponatime]

Voted for Daniel Larimer

[CLains]

 +5%

[hpenvy]

Let's get voting!

[hpenvy]

"Who has been the most influential person in bitcoin this year? Cast your vote now: http://coinde.sk/1wiIEAG "

Daniel Larimer