I don't like the functionality at all. At its best it is a feature that punishes controversial discussions. At worst, it is a tool for haves to bully the have nots. I understand the motivation but I believe there are large unintended consequences if we aren't careful.
Posted using Partiko Android
Well as a stakeholder I think it is extremely important we have the ability to fight abuse. We just have to teach people it is normal to receive flags.
If we have large stakeholders abusing their power that is a different issue which has nothing to do with the UI design.
The same tool that can fight abuse can lead to abuse. In my time using Steem I've received several dollars in down votes for expressing unpopular opinions.
Down votes are supposed to counter abuse. Despite having this feature, certain individuals earn the largest shares of the rewards pool by making several posts a day containing absolutely zero text. Why do I not mention them by name? I'm concerned about getting singled out by their followers, as I have been in the past.
Right now, the rich abuse the system with impunity because they can down vote you harder than you can down vote them.
Posted using Partiko Android
Changing the blockchain rules is not being discussed. We are discussing how to best communicate how the blockchain works via an Interface.
Alright then. The best idea is to remove it entirely from the UI. It's not like steemit hasn't done that before.
Posted using Partiko Android
I hear your opinion and I get it, but I couldn't disagree more. :)
Said with complete respect.
Agree to disagree, then!
Posted using Partiko Android
that sounds very fair.
Have you ever read the white paper? Not being snarky. I just can't imagine thinking the site could function and distribute rewards without also having the ability to cancel out those rewards.
Youre mixing up abuse and opinion which is ecactly the problem this change will exacerbate.
Posted using Partiko Android
Unintended consequences can mean anything.
That’s like saying there’s an unintended consequence of restaurants cleaning their dining room, so we shouldn’t clean the dining room.
Just because consequence are unintended does not mean they are unimaginable. I have two examples in my comment, after all.
Posted using Partiko Android
The proposed is a UI design change that has no impact on the core functionality of upvotes/downvotes. Can you think of any stakeholder with enough to 'bully the have nots' that doesn't know enough about Steem to deliver downvotes through some other channel than Steemit UI?
I've had witnesses tell me that it is no longer possible to use the blockchain to convert SBD to Steem. Out of sight, out of mind. So, to answer your question, yes, I can think of a few that don't think past the UI.
Posted using Partiko Android
I hope that any witness that told you conversions are no longer possible immediately lost your witness vote.
If somebody doesn't remember the difference between condenser and protocol, they should not be witnesses.
#sbi-skip
@josephsavage btw, I believe SBI will do great things for Steem. I'm leasing thousands of SP to it and using the profits to buy shares for undervalued content creators. I'm doing this because I believe the power of the upvote is stronger than the power of the flag.
Posted using Partiko Android
Thanks for your support! I saw you withdraw the direct delegation a couple of weeks ago and messaged on Discord. I figured it was because your pending balance got high and I was going to point out that you could lease through dlease.io instead. I guess you figured that out already. (I don't track who the delegators are through dlease.io very closely because they do that pretty well and have been super responsive when I've had issues.)
That being said, I do appreciate the real possibility of most power users doing it anyway
Posted using Partiko Android
I think the analogy would be, say a restaurant hires a busboy to clean. But he starts cleaning tables when people are still eating. This is an improper use of "cleaning." So the restaurant says, "we don't like the way people are cleaning, so lets get rid of all of the cleaning supplies." Problem solved?
I think the more appropriate analogy is the restaurant wants to clean off the tables by letting anyone take anything off any table. People put a lot of work into cooking a dish and someone throws it out before it is eaten. Why bother putting effort into cooking in a restaurant like that?
Posted using Partiko Android
Doesn't matter what the analogy is because you said:
Which, to me, means no cleaning because people might clean wrong.
Fine, let's use your analogy where everyone feel entitled to "clean" everyone else's table, which I agree is a terrible situation. So the restaurant says, "we don't like the way people are cleaning, so lets get rid of all of the cleaning supplies." Problem solved?
I don't think changing the analogy makes your solution of eliminating the functionality at all suddenly work.
Perhaps there is more than one way to clean a table.
Posted using Partiko Android
Warning. Contradiction detected: "I don't like the functionality at all; perhaps there's more than one way to do the thing we should't do at all."
The most sensible comment of all. THIS is exactly what will happen
Posted using Partiko Android