The proposed EIP aims to turn this type of behavior around. That is it's primary goal, to make the behavior that most would like to see on Steem be the more profitable route for people to take.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The proposed EIP aims to turn this type of behavior around. That is it's primary goal, to make the behavior that most would like to see on Steem be the more profitable route for people to take.
Along with that would it not make sense for Steemit to use its considerable stake to combat the biggest abusers that only it's capable of combating?
The EIP, if all goes well, will help, but actually joining the fight would not only push the changes you want to see faster, but also boost morale for a community that feels like Steemit is arming us with swords to go and fight the monsters while sitting on a stockpile of tomahawk missiles.
What is the logic behind Steemit not using it's stake?
It is sec related.
Controlling who gets rewards makes steem a security, or some such.
Stinc should give the blockchain its steem and let the witness supermajority downvote abuse, but that might cause steem to live up to its potential.
I think stinc decided to burn this to the ground just before booting dan.
Consider your sources.
If that's the reason, it should be screamed from the mountaintops. At least that way people would know they're not just negligent beyond all measure.
Yes, there are many moving parts in steem.
I was told by somebody that walks softly, but has big credibility.
It's harder playing this as a guessing game, but it does stretch out the entertainment.
When this is where a marketing expert ceo leads us maybe it's better not to know the full truth.
At 800k steem a month they will be gone soon enough.
They can only sell it once.
Let's hope good actors buy it.
I would assume it's something like people are already accusing them of being centralized so getting involved in the squabbles might cause more problems and make it feel more centralized but I of course would want to see it cleaned up more too
Posted using Partiko Android
Well I typically wouldn't want Steemit to jump in the middle of some squabble between users or anything like that, I'm more referring to huge whales simply using Steem as a money printer. As the largest stakeholder, if there's someone debasing your currency I'd assume you'd want to fight against it if you could(and they can), so it's weird that they don't. I can just about guarantee you'd get zero complaints from the community if Steemit started to use their stake to add value to the system. I'd argue that's their responsibility.
Yes and what about when or if people didn't agree? Do they need a set of guidelines, do they have to establish rules and policies and community standards? How long before they have the same issues as Facebook? People will cheer them on when they do what you want, but that could change. Honestly I'd rather the platforms just be platforms and not publishers like Facebook has become and it's a slippery slope. Again I would love if they helped, but I can see it being just as much as problem as them not getting involved. It's the same reason that phone companies do not ban telemarketers from using their phone services.
Don't get me wrong. When I say ban, I don't mean ban in the same way that it would work on a centralized platform. Steemit doesn't have the power to ban anyone in that way, and that's why it could never become like Facebook or Youtube. What I mean is that on THEIR frontend, they could moderate content. This is actually the reason all accounts have upvotes and downvotes, as well as it being the purpose of them.
Because of the way Steem is distributed, there is an "untouchable" class of abusers, that effectively the community can't moderate. Only Steemit could. The EIP is created to help with this problem, but as I mentioned before, Steemit is the only set of accounts that could effectively fight this abuse in the current system or possibly even after the EIP. Banning in the same way as a centralized platform is currently impossible here, as it should be.
To me that just seems to be a function of Steem and in that way it is like an anarchy. I'd support it at least for moderating plagarism. The problem with moderation for like you know who, there really aren't any community guidelines
Yes, I can see, on the surface and in theory, the benefits. I also know, from experience, since we won't see these benefits overnight, many will be in a panic, before things have a chance to progress. Be prepared for that.
I believe in Steem :) We've got to get on a call to talk Steemit soon!
And why didn't anyone address questions about this two years ago when linearity was being touted as the next great thing to bring in the masses and make Steem and its tokens more valuable?