There was something in the original post by @berniesanders that bothered me.
I could not put my finger on exactly what it was, so I reread the post, looked at the pics he posted of @haejin again etc. This thing gnawing at me, whatever it was continued to elude me, but I knew it was there.
It was one of those things you initially see, but your brain does not register until some time later when your involved with an unrelated task. Like trying to remember an old movie title; days later it will just pop in your head for no apparent reason.
Today, while looking at charts for some alt coins it hit me. It's the comma in the image of @haejin that was bothering me.
So I checked my own http://steem.supply/@pawsdog account to see how well I'm not doing, and sure enough I had a serious punctuation related epiphany.
If I go back to the original post by @berniesanders
and open the actual image link..
There is an odd comma after the 6 in regards to percentage of the rewards pool that @haejin is receiving. The placement is odd as it makes it read as 6,7149% instead of 6.7149%
So I pulled http://steem.supply/@haejin to see for myself what occurs when a whole number precedes the expected period in rewards payout as perhaps it may be an unexpected glitch by the programmers not expecting anyone to actually exceed an entire percentage point of the rewards pool.
Nope, as expected its a period which makes sense.
So I zoomed in...and decided to overlay them next to each other.
At this point I could see the one Bernie posted is a bit darker, which could likely be related to whatever method he used to save his; versus the method I used (PrntSceen/Paint) and proves nothing.
This comma business made me somewhat concerned in regards to the integrity of the original image. So I decided to go in, way in, 300 times or more zoom where I find that there is at least 1 pixel of spacing between every numeric character save the spacing between the 6 and the mystery comma. At which point the pixels forming lower right corner of the 6 overlap the upper left corner of the pixels related to the comma.
This again does not definitively prove anything as I am looking at an image of an image and the inconsistency may lie with that.
So I decided to investigate further and simply do the math and figure out where, if anywhere, the 6 could of come from. The rewards fund standing per the image bernie posted was $2,147,847.00 USD. 6 percent of that would be $128,870.82. I could not find anywhere that @haejin (while his current rewards are a bit ridiculous) approached the number actually required to achieve 6%. Granted I am not privy to how the algorithms are applied by steem.supply to make their calculations and print the HTML to the screen. Regardless I was still no closer to an answer as to where the 6 came from or the comma that followed it.
Remaining objective I began to consider the possibilities and narrowed it down to the three most likely candidates:
- There was some weird one off site glitch that occurred during the seconds that Bernie captured the image
- Incorrect mathematical algorithm being applied on steem.suppy
- The photograph was manipulated or altered in some way to profit the author by substantiating his message.
So I went back to the current http://steem.supply/@haejin to manually do the math and see if the figures are actually off all the time, but no one has actually taken the time to do the math on the big numbers, and just takes them at face value.
|Rewards Pool Total||$2,069,959|
|So I did the math..|
$2,060,959 x .020285 =
|$41,989.80 or .10 short of the listed rewards for @haejin|
The numbers and percentages added up, so they are not off all the time or that I can find. So I decided to dig a bit deeper and run the math backwards based on the numbers from the image provided by Bernie. In doing so I got .021863 or 2.1863%, not 6,7149 and still no comma.
|Image provided by @Berniesanders of http://steem.supply/@haejin||https://steemit-production-imageproxy-thumbnail.s3.amazonaws.com/U5dtC5UtoH9DwBvCaoQsaxeLMoiGCBy_1680x8400|
|Rewards Pool Total||$2,147,847|
|So I did the math..|
$46,960 divided by $2,147,847 =
| .021863 or 2.1863% and still no comma|
The figures from the image @berniesanders provided
DO NOT MATHEMATICALLY VALIDATE
So in conclusion, as I am not a forensic photograph analyst, I cannot decisively state that the original image provided by @berniesanders was manipulated or modified to be more inflammatory and deceive his followers so as to increase post traffic and consequently his earnings.
What I can say objectively and without taking any side on the issue is that:
I can find no other instances of a comma being used in the display of a users reward percentage following the whole number to delineate it from any fractional values that follow.
The percentage value in the image provided by @berniesanders does not mathematically validate.
I can find no other instance of http://steem.supply calculating an incorrect percentage value. Only in this single instance, per the image provided by @berniesanders, do all other values display correctly (total, payout etc) yet the percentage payout is mathematically incorrect relative to the other values on the same page used to calculate it.
The comma usage in the image provided by @berniesanders breaks the standard formatting rules I see currently displayed on steem.supply when listing the percentage of rewards pool to be paid out.
The comma key and period key are adjacent to one another on a standard keyboard increasing the likelihood of typographical errors when a typist desires to use one and mistakenly uses the other.
Perhaps the site software was updated or someone decided to use a calculator as opposed to an abacus since bernie posted his image? I am unsure, but I have to default to the figures in the image provided by @berniesanders not making mathematical sense which is irrefutable.
Is this proof of wrong doing or photo manipulation to make the image more inflammatory? Nope
Is this proof of a successful attempt to incite and unite the masses to a single cause so as Bernie could benefit financially from a busy high paying post based on deceit? Nope.
There may of been a glitch with the site at the time bernie pulled the information, but the formatting error and incorrect mathematical calculations provided in the image by bernie do concern me.
Again, I have no dog in the fight and am simply pointing out formatting and mathematical inconsistencies provided by one user as evidence of wrong doing by another.
If anyone could provide a plausible explanation to explain these inconsistencies perhaps we could open a ticket or contact the administrators of steem.supply to alert them that their site displays erroneous figures and formatting on occasion.
As provided by @moeknows it appears as though it was a site glitch inline with one of the possibilities I mentioned above.
That aside while I am glad members of the community investigated the issue and used the information provided to make their own decisions it does not (in my opinion) excuse the overtly aggressive lack of diplomacy displayed by @berniesanders. To that end I have commented below and offered him the opportunity to display a better side, to man up and to demonstrate a few of the traits inherent to all leaders.