Without the anti-abuse initiatives this platform would have been taken over by bots and the dumping would make a giant sucking sound as all the bagholders got dumped upon.
Have you spent any time checking up on what some of those folks do?
Not all of them are selfcentered jerks.
I do agree we should stop voting the rewards to largest accounts.
They have plenty, and only stop getting more when we stop voting it to them.
I am not against larger accounts. But I was concerned when I felt I was unfairly put on blacklists on Steemit and Hive. Some of my posts were downvoted, my REP score went down a few points a few times since I've joined in 2017. I'm trying to be neutral in this debate. For example, Logic mentioned Block Trades who has a website I've used for buying Bitcoin with. So, I'm not sure if I should not support a website like that.
I think the Block Trades website is useful. On one hand, I may want to support accounts relating to projects I prefer the most including Block Trades, Hive, Ecency, Peakd, Leo Finance, 3Speak, Hive Vote, etc.
But on the other hand, if some accounts are supporting downvote trails, that is where my concern lies to a degree. I can imagine that downvoting and flagging can and could and might do some good in countering spam, hate speech, plagiarism, repetition, redundancy, excess, viruses, bad things perhaps, etc, etc. I'm trying to be neutral in the debate. I understand the arguments regarding what you said, the anti-abuse initiatives.
But where do you draw the line between accounts which might be too big and too small? Accounts are always growing and shrinking. So, I try not to look at the size of the dog in the fight but more so in the size of the fight in the dog to quote Michael Jordan. Absolute power corrupts. The bigger people and corporations get, then that is when the problems can arise. There is a higher potential for abuse of power within centralization of rising power and control. So, choosing not to support larger accounts is a counteraction against that. You said you agree with not supporting larger accounts.
I somewhat agree with that to an extent. But at the same time, if I like an account, if I believe in an account, if I trust an account, a person, a company, etc, then I may support them regardless of how big.
I guess, I will have to take it on a case by case basis.
Right now, I am looking at the 30 witnesses I voted for. I may be changing some of my votes soon. I tend to focus on voting on who I like as opposed to focusing too much on who not to vote for.
My voting pattern probably sucks. I am giving away 100% votes on the posts I visit. Including any account strength. Though I am not visiting very often large account holders. Only exception: when it's about the voting issue. LOL
From a philosophical point of view, it's probably all idle. Those who absolutely have the will for change and influence assert it under all circumstances and also go into the financial stakes or engage in background talks. Those who should actually be in power do not want to have this power. But it is precisely them who should be elected. An unsolvable matter, it seems. Would you stand for election here as a Witness? Is that even possible? I have forgotten by now whether you can only be a witness if you also have a server where the block-building goes on.
Witnesses need a level of coding experience I don't have.
When things go wrong they need to be able to respond with solutions.
I would much rather see folks empower themselves by putting their opinions on the chain.
Everybody has a viewpoint that differs from all others, more voices equals a more diverse data set to make decisions from, imo.
I don't vote posts with more than 5htu on them even when I read the whole thing.
That is something folks have to decide for themselves.
Just getting the idea out there helps, so tell your readers that voting more power to the already overpowered is not helping the hive to decentralize.
The overpowered accounts shoot themselves in the foot when they agree to take more.
I think trying to network the hive to more people is the way, not overpowering it and maximizing returns to one's self.
Giving it away doesn't cut it because of the prejudice in who it is given to.
Taking from the pool to give to one's favorites centralizes who gets coins to those that brown nose the giver.
We are better served by folks that stand on their own, iyam.
Those bending their knees to the powerful are not helping in the long run.
100% THIS.
Ok, no secrets there.
You've been here long enough to see that the newbs are starting to gain ground on the old guard.
That will only increase, plenty of folks mad at hw.
guiltyparties claims hivewatchers has nothing to do with steemcleaners, and then just two days ago, they delegate 12,102 to steemcleaners
Ah, there is some data I missed.
I don't know what to do about all that, just yet.
The long game is that all those people will slowly lose power due to dilution by the inflation.
We need to build the new to make the old obsolete, and that is happening.
At one time we would have gotten wiped from the pool just for having this conversation on the chain.
Now, we just need to get folks to stop voting the big accounts.
With linear rewards there is no advantage to voting posts with large payouts.
You get the same curation rewards on a .1htu post as you do a 500htu post.
Anybody with any sense of what is happening knows it is in their best interest to spread the coin to those without any, rather than those with the most, but web 2.0 still feeds into the popular.
That will change with time.
Anybody dumping their hive over emotional reactions is gonna regret it in 5 years, or less.
In the second year I was here I recognized the problems presented by the ninjamine blowing out the math.
Most of the beneficiaries of that largess are gone, though not all.
Just a matter of time and the field will level itself, if we stop voting rewards to the largest accounts.
There it is.
Yes, and now things are different.
Not ideal, but not as bad as it could be.
sure.
all i'm suggesting is that it's silly to vote for accounts that are downvoting you.
all i'm suggesting is that it's silly to vote for accounts that are downvoting your friends.