I remember when I first started here how excited I was and how positive I was. When I was only getting cents for my first-time releases, I got curious how the others were doing it, whose payouts regularly saw more than 50 or 100 crypto dollars. I remember very well saying to my husband, "I'm going to try that." A blogger whose posts I enjoyed reading posted in the science corner and I asked her how she had managed to get a regular rain of rewards. After a few forays into the back chat rooms, I had realised that it was possible to join a guild and I threw myself into it with vigour.
Part of me knew that as well as the themes I really cared about, it was always a game we were all playing.
The inconsistency in one's own existence, that the individual is always also considered valuable, knows about the group dynamic that gives it all a semblance of insignificance. In the sense that it is advertising, for example.
The highly rated postings are the advertisements for newcomers to try out to see if they get similar attention and rewards as those they have taken as their role models. There is nothing wrong with that for a start.
It was only over time, as I became aware of the flag wars at the edges of my perception, that I developed a view on this. For my sake, of course, it could have gone on forever and I really couldn't complain about too few payouts and attention.
But the self-saboteur in me also questioned what I was actually doing and the critic regularly asked me: what are you promoting? Does it have anything to do with your reality? Isn't blogging also a form of extroversion and the desire for recognition, a compensation for something?
Those who were severely disappointed have, in my opinion, been caught up in their own foolishness, that this is about more than passing time and following a mega-trend, where it is about using one's own person and throwing oneself on a market that does not guarantee any commitment.
Criticism of the operators of this platform feels like spoken into the empty space, actually a soliloquy, since no contracts or guarantees are negotiated. This is the expression of modern man, who is active in the media and is always on probation in the great field of uncertainty.
There is no point of contact, no real person with a legal name to whom one can turn and with whom one can negotiate a fixed amount of money for a limited period of time, for example, according to which one is then paid. Since none of the higher ranks seems to have such a contract with anyone either. As nobody enters into a stable, transparent, binding and legally secured relationship with anybody, everything remains rather opaque and vague.
The advantage this offers at the same time is not to commit oneself anywhere, to act when one feels like it and to withdraw when one does not feel like working.
When I compare my existence here with previous professional and private relationships, I come to the conclusion that this non-commitment is two sides of the same coin: I don't have to stick to anything, I have the freedom to come and go as I please. On the other hand, none of the interest groups want to have anything to do with people whose commitment seems somehow uncertain and want to oblige you to work regularly. Over time, however, it becomes obvious that you can only keep this up for a certain period of time because, I think, arbitrariness still gets the upper hand because you simply cannot take this sphere seriously.
Others who try to influence the sphere with dogged seriousness and ambition will sooner or later be overwhelmed by the too loose and anonymous relationships, and will cut back on their initial commitments. The exception is probably those whose real weal and woe depends on the flow of money and who, they may tell themselves, cannot afford to do anything other than create blocks and beat the publicity drum.
In a way, it's all not such a great evil, I think you always have to be clear about the space you are entering and what you intend to say to it.
Awareness of the internal politics, yes, I agree, that may not be something people do have. But gaining awareness about it, often does not make ones own stand and notion better. Oftentimes I think that it might have been better for me to not involve myself too much in those politics.
Ah, ... I cannot cut myself short. Apologies. But I think you can handle it :)
The hive is what we make of it.
Some people don't like having to share the power to shape things, it's this way or the highway.
Each has to make their own choice and suffer the derision of those that chose differently.
Either way, biting the hand that feeds you is a poor choice, iyam.
For my part, I am sometimes critical and ask questions if I find something inconsistent, or drop some humor. If that's biting ..? ... Well, maybe it is not even smart to ask questions.
I hear you, it's what we make of it.
If one has the data to support any claims, then speaking up is duty, but if one engages in emotional appeals, the emotional reactions of others may not be consistent with one's own.
Here in the hive, discretion is a must for those pushing back against power.
POS conflict is won by having more stake.
Those with less stake get less say in matters.
This is only an issue when one doesn't have the data to support the claims being made.
Are you speaking of others when you mention "emotional" appeals? I do not make them, for my part.
What you say is logically correct. However, I believe that emotional expressions - not appeals - carry their weight and are influential in one way or another (unless they are extreme).
Even if people disagree and the interlocutors react contradictorily to each other, the matter is not necessarily settled. Sometimes people say something or react emotionally harshly or arrogantly, but what someone has expressed continues to accompany them and they may reconsider what was pointed out to them. You don't always get to hear about that. It is not easy to admit mistakes or double standards, for example.
Yes, not you, you are more rational than emotional, so far.
Tears do help get what you want, most times.
The world will be a better place when one has to admit their wrongs rather than pretend they don't exist.
The blockchain is bringing this.
Lies are gonna have to step up their game to get by in a world where everything is recorded by the panopticon.
I'd think emotional reactions might diminish, too.
In deed, even complaining loudly often helps you get what you want. People eventually give in if you keep pestering them over and over again and won't give up. I have personally either observed or experienced this myself many times, both in one position and the other. I am softened by tears in particular.
When playing cards or board games, I sometimes have a strategy - not even consciously - of loudly lamenting my card misfortune and constantly complain about the cursed cards or unfair moves as the game progresses, which softens the other person and he grants me advantages that he would not otherwise have granted me had I remained composed. HaHa!!!
There are differences of course, some days I play to my hand without any regrets and win and lose easily. Whenever I become a child at the game, it takes its toll on my fellow players. They usually become more forgiving the more they are penetrated. Of course, this only works if you don't meet a similar childish teammate. If that one manages to surpass you even more, the roles will swap. I then let the other one go first, because he doesn't seem to be able to take his misfortune in a sporting way at that moment. So it's a back and forth of emotions and role reversals.
If this is done voluntarily, much is gained. Under coercion, it is much more difficult.
The Panopticon is world-class at recording, but as long as it is the human being who has to laboriously wade through the concatenations of actions and statements, the confusion will remain. I mean not to suggest that the automatic detection of lies or discrepancies by machines would be better. On the whole, I don't think much of taking events out of the box, because it involves an effort that is often not worth the trouble of dealing with it. It usually makes people grumpy. Anyone who doesn't become grumpy and ill-tempered in the process, I would gladly give such tasks to. I just don't know anyone.
I don't think they will diminish, though. For above reasons (role changing). You are not always playing one character, aren't you?