damnit this is why I need to create my @witchunt app
so the mob can protect itself and downvote trash in peace without retaliation.
flagging someone because they flagged you is the dumbest shit.
that behavior coming from the top brass is downright embarrassing for the platform.
former top20 witness even :)
guess him deactivating his witness as soon as he realized he couldn't stay up there through votetrading anymore tells more about him than his use of downvotes ever could
@witjjunt Sounds like a good app to have around. Hope you are able to create it.
@acidyo thinks because he "manually curates" he should be respected and admired and he has right to "police the baddies"
This shit is funny.
If I wanted to know what @acidyo thinks some random person I've never talked to probably isn't going to help me with that. In any case, since when is downvoting garbage on trending "policing the baddies"? Interesting logic there.
Because if the system put them there (blind votes by automation which is what this place became long ago) then it's avoiding the true issue and just focusing on the "boogie man" by attacking the individual account.
It's exactly what happened when @haejin was winning $400+ daily rewards by posting fast content on market analysis. He wasn't doing anything wrong. In fact he was doing EVERYTHING RIGHT and that's what bothered people. That he was winning so much by what looked to them like little effort. Yet their efforts (which they perceived to be more honourable) wasn't getting near the same rewards.
It's funny that when flaws of a collective show (be it an online community or even family units), the infighting goes up. Well it's not funny, but funny here means "human behaviour which is actually ignoring the real issue and pretending the fix is much easier."
The issue being put forth is simple: If someone downvotes simply because they got downvoted, that person is a tool. That's always going to be true no matter what kind of changes could get made to the platform.
You're talking to someone who thinks curation should be eliminated entirely, which would obviously end all this autovoting bullshit entirely, because there's no longer a financial incentive to do it. Curation is, and always has been and will be, a stupid zero-sum game that gives bots the advantage when it comes to farming ROI.
The solution is to simply get rid of curation as we know it and apply a bunch of our inflation to the bank accounts (essentially approved self-upvoting via interest rates). The bank accounts can also double as collateral for creating HBD under DeFi protocols.
All of this is kind of irrelevant. If someone sees a post they think is being overpaid they should be able to flag it without the fear of retribution. End of story. These micro-terrorist tactics of retribution flagging are unacceptable and should be punished by consensus in one form or another. I was going to create a dapp called @witchunt that does just that. We'll see.
Yeah well there you go that's forward thinking, identifying a true fix for the system. I agree with your suggestion entirely and that app would be a positive addition.
I don't agree with your exemption from retaliation though. With the current system the downvote is an option even 'just because'. The thing I find laughable with acidyo is that he thinks just because he's a manual curator he should be special. He often blabbers on about it like he is some gem of crypto. So naturally his feelings get hurt. He doesn't take criticism well.
Maybe, interesting idea.
Mine was a linear curation function so that it doesn't matter when you vote or how many other users have already voted.
Yes, this is what @theycallmedan is pushing as well; not a bad idea.
But tell me, what is the point of that?
Again, this is just the same as self upvoting.
You can literally upvote whatever you want and get a known-in-advance kickback.
The only difference between this idea and adding a lot of interest to the banks accounts is that people who want to self-vote get a say about who appears on the trending tab (should they???). It also forces people to only self-upvote 50% rather than dumping all their stake into the bank account and trying to max ROI.
Personally I like the idea of greedy people exiting the reward pool and moving all their stake to the bank accounts. More upvote power for me.
It also makes zero sense for the network to assume that frontends are curating content based on price. Curation in the form of kickbacks isn't going to make sense in ten years at all because smarter trending tabs are going to be developed that stop people from exploiting the system we have today.
It would be a compromise ... Many stakeholders will tell you that getting no curation rewards at all anymore decreased the attractivity of holding HP too much (also don't forget that since EIP curation rewards got increased to 50 % due to their intervention).
It will be hard enough to convince them of my (and as it seems also @theycallmedan's) suggestion which is somewhat less 'radical'. At least getting some curation rewards could still motivate stakeholders to upvote content at all - and as there wasn't any advantage to upvote early, everybody would be free to upvote what they really like.
That said I personally could live well with your suggestion, and I am not against at least considering it.
Not funny ha ha, but funny strange.
lol exactly. See @edicted the antisocialist gets it! (You got it too though but this put it back to ha ha funny!)
I had an idea about combating downvotes or redesigning the whole system of DV. Essentially it needs communities to be thriving. Then if some random big wig does give a DV the community has ability to either endorse that DV as "hey man you really weren't adding quality to our group" or upvote in support. By their many upvotes against the DV it would then recover the loss and give the "strike" against the big wig that could exist later on as "your DV power is nullified because you're just a mean person for the fun of it."
As it is a big wig gets no negative consequence against an "unjustified DV" and also the ones who suffer are the little shrimp that have no ability to retaliate. @blocktrades for instance agrees his bot combating rancho/haejin upvotes DOES HURT shrimp and he at least believes a 'postit note' saying "oops sorry I took your bread, here's why" could at least inform the recipient as to why the DV took place.
Long ago when communities were announced I made a similar comment that there could be healthy competition between communitie by users supporting growth and assuring safety in numbers. That it would really drive engagement and growth if it was an integral part of the system. I don't see that here though. Some communities get treated preferably by the blind voting system. Others are essentially just a group of hopefuls/tragics counting pennies. There's many ways this could be repaired but as @edicted pointed out as long as that curation rewards IS THE DUMB SYSTEM then no one cares to change it. No one even reads shit around here really. Then if they read something that doesn't agree with them (@acidyo) they avoid it.
Hive market cap going under tho....
At what point do people actually stop and say out loud.. "ok we have a leaking ship here." Toastmaster4420 (the hope magician) thinks the outside world of crypto realising new ideas like DeFi (and a new one every year) is how Hive will grow. Like seriously...? It's like saying "more ice bergs would have steadied the Titanic."
Anyway I just got up from a nap and had a coffee so I think I'm buzzing dreaming of perfect systems. I'm muted by most here anyway so likely no one will even get a notification. Let's start our own token and platform @antisocialist. We can call it Hornet. Or Whore-net - ewards for anti social pricks! Wait... that's Hive already!
teknow is a constant pessimistic troll I decided was not worth the time to read anymore so muted him, there's no reasoning with him.
Ah, that's unfortunate.
Lol after I criticized your poshtoken that doesn't even give people real rewards to those working as the Twitter spam/marketing team. I told you that it would just be seen as shilling and that they deserve real rewards NOW.. NOT "if the poshtoken ever goes live."
That's when you muted me. Be honest at least and show me where you tried to reason? You even made a follow up post saying "after some have identified errors".
You can't handle HONEST CRITICISM because this place is just about brown-nosing so you and @theycallmedan can run your deadend initiatives using free labour. Who cares ay.. those poor fools take what they get. Even they (the free workers) admitted that people are muting them and asking them to stop spamming. Stellabella then had to give people retraining on how to not make their tweets look so spammy so she literally repeated what I pointed out.
Anyway this is all funny.
Call me an instigator if you want.
Call me out on lies though.. if you can.
Did I lie.... I never... Lie!
"pessimistic troll"
Lol that's essentially saying:
"he identified errors and I don't like to read that"