This is really poorly researched, which is a shame because blockchain projects are open and transparent and Steemit should hold articles critical of competitors and other chains to higher standards, if only for the fact that they will naturally draw in people from other projects and perhaps be the first thing by which they judge Steem. In this case, they would think we can't research, analyze, or write well.

Here is an example of non-existent reseach.

The article claims: "As more and more tokens are created, large sums of ETH is taken out and set aside, this creates a bubble. Most of these tokens if not all have a monthly burn rate, which means they all have to dump ETH to supposedly fund their projects. We will reach a point where the ETH being dumped far exceeds the ETH being locked away."

The amount of ETH locked up in contracts for ICOs and tokens is not even 3% of all ETH. It is not even a material amount of ETH. Furthermore, the largest token contracts that hold ETH have barely sold or not sold any ETH.

To check to see if this analysis makes any sense, you can look at the daily trading volume of ETH and compare it to the amount of ETH locked up in these contracts and see how much market impact these token contract held ETH have relative to the market. In the last 24hours, there has been $500mm in trading volume in ETH. That is more than ALL the ETH held by token contracts. This thesis doesn't hold water.

And the research is so bad here that it makes Steemit look bad. We need to hold our articles to higher standards than this.