Seems you just posted this for rewards and also you are a cunt.
(I'm very sorry, I think this is an unacceptable way to conduct myself on the platform, but it seems that popular opinion is this is cool!
Have a great day
By the way, this is the last time I will post this.
It was your response that I was the most disappointed with.
Bernie is going to Bernie. Drama is going to Drama, but I have no idea what you guys are trying to accomplish at this point.
Anyway, best of luck!
I don't think "cool" is the word many people here would use to describe this behavior. I certainly wouldn't. As it happens, I posted this in a community, which means I or another moderator could easily mute you here if you were considered "abusive" enough.
Anyways, I think you missed the heart of the "debate" you're referring to, if you think it was over obscenities. It became obvious to me eventually it was all about rewards.
I simply don't think I or anyone else here should be able to prevent you from voting your stake as you will on the platform, as that is somewhat fundamental to the way the blockchain works. But 2nd layer systems can be built on top of it that work differently, and that's one of the things I plan to do before too long as a way for allowing an entirely different sort of reward system.
I've always been an advocate of freedom of stake and also speech.
I don't think I am the one who missed anything though, I read every line and every response.
I think many of you missed the heart of the debate, which was focused on adoption,
Not function.
It would have been very easy to take even 1 percent of the responses and say,
"This is unacceptable" to the person who's behavior was outrageous.
That alone would have gone a long way. Words are words, I don't get too upset about them, but when you are critical and come up with theories on why someone would post here, I'm left wondering why anyone who doesn't need a few cents would post here.
The focus on making it not about rewards, means it has to be about user experience.
Oh.
I find it strange how you can separate adoption and function. They are strongly related.
If you read every line, then you also read that I don't think the goal of Hive should be "adoption at any cost". I stand by that. I believe Hive has to have a higher goal that just adoption and therefore profit for the token holders. I wouldn't spend my time on it if that was the only goal as I have enough money to live comfortably already.
One of those goals that I believe is important is to function as a place where people can form communities where they can speak their minds (and still control spam/insults from others).
Perhaps you're arguing that the setup of communities needs to be clearer, so that newcomers start out in a moderated community when they first join, so they aren't exposed to abusive language that they aren't used to (because centralized platforms are mostly moderated) or that they simply can't tolerate. That's certainly a position that I could see for debate.
But I didn't get the impression that such debate was of interest to cryptofinally. She seemed entirely focused on personal insults to her and never once replied with an argument for why communities couldn't solve this problem, and given she then went on to support dlike, I don't think I was wrong to think she's a very shallow thinker who is motivated by attention and the potential of profiting from shilling cryptocurrency.
I really do appreciate the thoughtful answers especially based on how I started the conversation.
While I know there are thoughts on improving the UI, being a deep thinker is generally not a requirement for social media end-user adoption. We both know this isn't an isolated "one-off" case.
Just being left alone to talk about whatever they want within their own circles is usually the goal. (to your point about communities)
I do appreciate the time, I'll keep an eye on developments.
Yes, and I don't demand deep thinking when it comes to debating problems with the platform. If someone keeps the focus on what those problems actually are, and responds to my points in turn, it helps me think about the problems too.
In fact, as you paid some attention to what I was saying and responded based on that, you got me thinking about a possible problem with people being aware of communities and at least one possible solution to that problem. OTOH, if you had ignored almost everything I said, and then looked for the one thing in what I said that seemed to support a personal grievance, then this discussion would have been a lot less productive. In other words, thanks for listening and commenting.
OMG
the issue is on the table now
Being back Drama token!
I designed it hoping to bring some fun and lighthearted engagement.
I'm completely unclear what Hive wants to attract. I already wasted funds on having it developed once.
I think I'll wait until some clearer plan develops.
do you need me to ship you some pills?
I agree: everybody should be able to do with their stake whatever they want, but at the same time I wonder what prevents other big stake holders to use their stake somewhat more often to counter (in their own interest and also in view of the reputation of HIVE) the actions of 'whales' who enjoy doing things like posting penises on other platforms (which instead to damage them, damages the reputation of HIVE!) and regularly downvote (for personal reasons or disagreement on opinion) and insult other users in a justiciable way?
Things like spam, plagiarism or farming are combated, and rightly so, why not also combat the actions of bigger stake holders which cause a devastating impression when HIVE is watched from outside?
I don't say anybody should be prevented from downvoting, but I wonder why big stake holders very rarely try to help the 'victims' (I know this word is somewhat overdramatic)? Everybody can and should curb spam, but to curb the actions of 'crazy whales', unfortunately, big stake holders are needed. Why not just flag insulting comments like for example these against @cryptofinally, just to show that the majority of big stake holders prefers to discuss things in a civilized way instead of attacking people with different opinions? Downvoting insulting comments of course wouldn't mean to agree (for example) with @cryptofinally, it would just show to disagree with insulting HIVE users. That also wouldn't be censorship (as you often state yourself that downvoting != censorship).
Apropos, do I care about rewards? Sure, somewhat. However, is that the reason for writing comments like this one? Of course NOT:
Firstly, comments like this could well serve to permanently reduce my rewards significantly. :)
Secondly, my point of view is that my main aim is not to get more rewards but to increase the value of HIVE (which would be much more beneficial for me than increasing my rewards, while the HIVE price remained low).
Before I forget it: thanks for all the precious development work (which is a really big contribution to increase the value of HIVE)!
I could downvote Bernie's comments all day (well, and I did at one point, when he was upvoting them to milk rewards), and he'd simply laugh about it. But there's no rewards on the current comments and it's not like he cares about reputation. To me the most applicable solution to someone that's continually insulting you is to mute them if you don't want to see it.
hey.. im curious what is the story with you downvoting my and other posts that have upvotes from rancho? It seems odd for you to downvote like this on posts that dont seem to break any conventions here.. I dont consider his upvotes random.. these are big effort community posts i have been doing for nearly three years ..
Its a little frustrating because i also have been flagged to death on Steem ...for again someone else's story.. and i invested years and many thousands on being here.. thanks...
You can ask around for a full history of ranchorelaxo if you like, but I don't have the time to repeat it right now. I can assure you his votes are not based on content. Right now I think he's upvoting whatever is on hot or trending, I haven't bothered to figure out which.
i assume you mean the long saga of rancho and haejin.. now by the looks of it you also dont approve of him upvoting hot or trending posts.. to me that is not random and im surprised you take such a strong stance on it... it feels to me like you have a personal issue with rancho.. and as a result you are flagging people like me.. which seems a weird way to go about things..
now you see. others are following your lead and are also downvoting my posts..
you know.. i dont see how this is helping anything.. and to me it just makes no sense.. it seems like yet another personal vendetta that is spilling onto other peoples laps.. honestly.. i can think of FAR worse things than someone using their voting power to support good posts! meanwhile.. id like you to know that these kinds of acts push people like me one step further out the door.. which is a shame considering what i have put into this ecosystem so far.. and indeed what i have had to put up with in so many ways...
i ask you to stop your bot because it will do more harm than good.. people DON'T like being downvoted. i dont mind nearly as much as some people who take it VERY personally and stop posting... thanks for listening,
Then looks are deceiving. I don't know personally know haejin or ranchorelaxo, and as far as I can remember, I've never had even an on-chain conversation with either one of them.
He's not voting based on content. As I already mentioned, it's not strictly random, as hes voting for whatever is on hot or trending.
But that voting pattern is also bad, IMO, because it just focuses out-sized rewards to a few people instead of distributing the rewards more reasonably among posters. If you makes you feel better, you can view it as reward disagreement, since I think getting votes without anyone paying attention to the content tends to lead more reward than should be received.
There's also another issue with the ranchorelaxo stake, since it appears it's being voted against the wishes of the actual owner, by haejin who seems to have the posting key, but not the active key. This creates a perverse incentive in terms of voting, since his primary interest becomes maximizing rewards of the haejin account, while ignoring the potential losses in stake value of the ranchorelaxo account from his actions.
Finally, I reject your claim that others are "following" my downvote. I think you'll find that others are countering haejin and ranchorelaxo's votes, but generally speaking they were doing so before I started. I mainly started because others asked for my help in doing so.
Lmao blocktrades is the last person who would post stuff for rewards.
Yeah, I know. The point was most people don't like it when out of the blue you call them damns and assign weird accusations.
:) But, I yeah, I know you are right.
Hm, so your objective is just to create drama out of nothing ?
Pretty sure I didn't make the drama.
Blocktrades managed the conversation just fine.
Don't ruin it. :)
Wouldn’t be drama token without the drama right?
That bad hey? Lol any place I can go to catch up on this hot tea?
Ma'me with all due respect, shut the fuck up already, you dont like it? GTFO then and go suck suns cock.
The only cunt here, ma'me , is you, just drop it.
I've only responded... I was fine with the answers. Keep showing how fun it is on Hive though.