The Steem code was essentially feature-complete at launch so everyone could look through the source code as I did in order to determine what the coin was intended to do
Just like everyone could've installed VirtualBox+Linux on their Windows machines at Dash launch to mine yet that's one of the key points you like to attack.
I think you have me confused with cryptohunter. I don't think Windows binaries are that big a deal, although certainly if you are going to huge number of coins in the first hour even time spent compiling is a disadvantage. Steem didn't do that; mining was flat and there was plenty of time to figure out how to compile it (or follow the posted instructions).
Go ahead and look at my
Dash instamine thread. It doesn't mention it, except to point out how Evan was offering 5000 XCO for someone to compile it shortly after launch, demonstrating that he had already mined a lot of it.
Which is easier, reading through code to determine wtf it is, or following through 5 step instructions on how to install VirtualBox+Linux?
You could do exactly the same virtual box deal with steem, so that can't possibly be a point in favor of Dash. By the time of the relaunch there was a step-by-step mining guide posted.
The Steem developer told people at launch that he was mining a lot and released the names of the accounts he was using for mining, making it all transparent, disclosed to all participants, and verifiable on the blockchain (there are no relevant privacy features and the blockchain uses transparent named accounts for all operations).
How do you know he didn't have more accounts he didn't disclose?
It doesn't matter if he did. He transparently mined almost all the coins anyway. Hardly anything left to hide, especially after accounting for the (relatively tiny) mining done by me and a few others.
The Steem token is totally unsuitable for use as a cryptocurrency, and no one (including the devs) suggests otherwise. So again, comparing it and its distribution with Dash (even if Dash's distribution were likewise transparent which it mostly is not) makes no sense.
Why are they unsuitable as cc? Are they better suitable as speculation tokens? They seem to be perfectly suitable for generating BTC and new bagholders judging from the Bittrex action.
It is unsuitable because in unlocked form it has permanent 100+% per year inflation. Unless you live in Venezuela, I can't really see anyone finding that an attractive proposition (and even then, Bitcoin or something else is far more attractive). In locked form it has 0-10% inflation but can't be spent and can only be unlocked slowly over a two-year period.
The purpose of the token is to serve, in locked form, as a form of sybil-resistant karma, reputation, and voting power on the social media site. The unlocked form exists only temporarily to facilitate transfers, after which someone needs to relatively quickly relock it or see it inflated away. Steemit, by the way, doesn't use the karma aspect of their holdings at all (voting or posting on the site). The coins just sit there in a transparent account doing nothing (which causes them to slowly lose value).
Whether or not you think any of this is a good idea (many aspects of it are half-baked at best IMO), there is no way to consider any of this a cryptocurrency where you (or at least some people even if not you) might consider speculating on it becoming widely accepted as a currency.
There is a smartcoin USD-pegged token (that doesn't exist yet) that will be used to payout rewards for the best posts, but that's still not something you would want to speculate on either, unless you feel like speculating on a likely-inferior-to-the-original USD (other than possibly speculating on the failure of the pegging as recently happened with Nubits).