You have a point. Or two.
Lately I've been on a quest to find better content.
Specifically, I want more poetry, short stories, and essays about basically anything other than Hive or politics.
Drama about Hive, stats about Hive, basically anything that references Hive, is like going to a library to read books about the library. Written by gossipy librarians. =p
Yup, and I mean hey when there's something new about Hive or some new ideas or happenings it's all good. Also when new people come here and explain their experience and what they think about it it can be interesting after having been here for so long you kind of just forget what it's like to see shit with new eyes. Making all of your posts about downvotes? Raising hell and pointing at flaws and why Hive will go to 0, etc, because you pissed off some stakeholders and no one gives a shit to counter their downvotes is really not content nor should it get rewarded.
We mainly focus on niche communities with our curation on @ocd, maybe you can find some of the posts we highlight daily there. For poetry/short stories I believe the inkwell is a good community to check out: https://peakd.com/c/hive-170798/created
@acidyo, I am relatively new to Hive (came on-board in February thanks to @theycallmedan). I initially found Hive to be a 'breath of fresh air' and I gave extra-credit to encourage my students give it a try. Beginning in February, I transitioned away from all other forms of social media (and haven't missed that a bit). And, up until recently, I have been planning to make value-creation via Hive a mandatory term-project for my students this fall (I teach a university honors seminar on Entrepreneurial Value Creation in Society).
However, what I have witnessed the past 6 weeks or so with respect to downvotes by whales for 'over-rewarded' posts quite honestly disgusts me. @dwinblood has done an excellent job explaining why opinion-based downvotes are problematic. He has also done an excellent job summarizing why removing downvotes altogether (and other efforts to 'fix' the various abuse problems associated with
Steem/ Hive) have also proven problematic.His perspective is the best I have heard. He spent lots of energy arguing against downvotes in the early days of
Steem, then, through that dialogue, began to see the 'other' perspective (or at least began to appreciate the nuanced nature of it all).Although I believe serious reform is needed with respect to the way the downvote protocol functions on Hive, I am focusing at the moment on experimenting with creative ways to deal with this issue at the tribe level, namely the Proof of Brain tribe.
When I first began dialoguing with @theycallmedan in January, and had him discuss Hive with my students in February, I was extremely bullish about Hive and its untapped potential. However, I have to say that this whole notion of 'we must be able to downvote over-rewarded posts' (and how persistent that ethos pervades this ecosystem, at least among those who hold the 'power') leaves me relatively lukewarm about Hive and its future potential.
As an outsider, I can tell you that this concept of downvoting 'over-rewarded' posts is repulsive to me (because of the message it sends to all those upvoters who are having their votes and curation rewards nullified by someone else's 'opinion'). And, it is making me seriously second-guess whether or not to incorporate some form of mandatory Hive participation into my course curriculum this fall.
In particular, your downvote of this post, which has generated an extreme amount of interesting engagement and dialogue, represents an exemplary display of bad form, imho -- and merely serves to conform the OP's argument. You disagree with some of the views expressed by the author and, as is your right, you have expressed your disagreement in the comments. However, you also felt it necessary to nullify 201 upvotes in the process. You can say that you were merely countering the upvotes of haejin/ranchorelaxo, but the reality is that you directly punished 200+ freedom-loving, critical-thinking Hivians who valued the content and the engagement and debate sparked by this post.
At this point, the one thing that gives me hope is the fact that there are many within the Proof of Brain tribe who are willing to put some creative energy into curbing the potential for downvote abuse by whales (and upvote abuse, also), while also combatting plagiarism and spam -- and letting the community-at-large decide what constitutes 'over-rewarded' content, via establishment of some objective standards.
I don't expect to change your mind with my words here. But hopefully I can provide some of the "when new people come here and explain their experience" perspective that you seem to be open to.
To summarize, imho, finding a suitable alternative for stemming abuse is paramount, if Hive is to ever be poised for exponential growth. We need an alternative that can effectively punish bad actors without simultaneously punishing good or neutral actors -- an alternative that can also keep abuse-watchers from being abusers themselves.
An 'ideal' solution is probably not feasible. However, I have no doubt that numerous 'better ways' exist. At this point, experimentation and iteration at the tribe level seems the best way to discover and flesh out some of those 'better ways'. Hopefully you are supportive of tribes seeking to do just that.
Most of the debate and comments occurred after the downvotes, whereby I even considered removing a couple after the amount of engagement it received. The downvotes occurred due to him using an example of someone who in my opinion fairly deserved the downvotes he got, had he used any other examples I may have not downvoted him with both of the accounts I downvoted with.
Your opinion in general is pretty void about downvotes. We've tried for many years not using downvotes for overrewarded content or people straight up abusing the rewardspool with mumbo jumbo such as technical analysis or now anti-vax conspiracies, downvote mana would cost upvote mana and barely anyone would use it back in the day. In the long run all it did was make everyone farm more, vote on friends, vote where they'd maximize the reward allocation to a select few, create backroom deals where they'd get higher curation off-chain kickbacks. It sucked for decentralization of stake and its wide distribution. I realize it may be hard to see where it would lead being new to Hive and not having been around the days when no one used downvotes and what occurred but that's the truth.
Now with linear curve it is even more important that downvotes affect the way we curate and allocate the rewardspool. It's now again easier to give bigger votes to friends, only a select few or willy nilly like some do such as traf and rancho. I've been someone who's been trying for five years now to distribute stake as wide as possible and as fairly as possible and at the same time can attest that most of the content on Hive compared to most other places is overrewarded, complaining about a few downvotes on the top of the top of overrewarded posts is very narrowminded.
I remember your interview with Dan and when you joined and invited a few students over which I personally curated but your concerns over not inviting your students based on downvotes for overrewarded posts makes close to 0 sense to me. I highly doubt they'd be a target of downvotes as I personally focus on those who receive those rancho votes all too often or on content that's not worth it.
I'm not against coming up with better solutions and downvotes certainly aren't the most optimal solution, using tribes to come up with better ways is great but I'm not seeing much of that. The PoB people seem to instead want to use some centralized ways of muting accounts (from their earnings even which is so baffling to me it makes me not want to look into what else they're doing at all, nor have I once posted in there because of that). Come up with better decentralized ways to handle a balanced pool allocation and you'll have my respect and I'm sure that of most Hive stakeholders as well, so much so that Hive would definitely consider implementing the better solution in another hardfork. Until then this is the best way we have and complaining endlessly about it or each scenario in and of itself isn't going to fix anything nor is any of it reward worthy in my opinion.
I think this is the crux of the 'problem' (or, disagreement, if you will).
Those with heavy
Steem/ Hive experience seem to view downvotes as a sacred cow without which the platform would have crashed and burned long ago (and this may quite well be true).As an outsider, I see the potential for downvote abuse and downvote wars as so anathema that I am now reticent to actively bring others on board until a viable alternative is in place.
In my numerous dialogues with @themarkymark about this issue (which we clearly disagree on, but about which we have been able to continue constructively dialoguing), he has stated numerous times that he basically views my concerns as a 'non-issue' (i.e. seeking a solution to a non-existent problem), that downvote abuse is rare, and that the benefits of free downvotes far outweigh the downsides.
I am looking at this from a newcomer's perspective; and I can tell you that what little bit of downvote abuse I have seen has been enough to convince me that my initial bullish view of Hive is perhaps unwarranted. The 'free downvote' represents such a stark potential for abuse of power and for ideological downvote wars and other toxic behavior, that it has seriously caused me to take a step back.
I am actively working with a handful of folks within the PoB tribe because they seem to share a similar ethos and a willingness and desire to experiment and try new ways to solve old problems. If we are successful, then perhaps Hive can adopt some of what we come up with. If not, then I will likely shift my focus away from the social-media aspect of Hive (and probably spend more time delving into SPK and other Layer 2 initiatives).
Not as much of a non-issue just a extremely small and very rare issue. There is 10,000x more upvote abuse happening on a daily basis. Yet almost no one does anything about it.
"Downvote abuse" which happens very infrequently already has a very simple solution. Upvotes! Problem solved. Post rewards are a community effort and no one person has complete say on them. If you disagree with the rewards for a post (too much or too little) you can do something about it. The real problem is rarely does anyone.
Either way, I hear about one or two people being “maliciously downvoted” every 3 months or so. I’m downvoting garbage upvotes on a daily basis for the last 4 years.
Yep it's so small of an issue but people make it a big one because money. People could instead discuss how to counter malicious downvotes and explain why they feel they are malicious instead of giving up on everything Hive is because of a few people in their eyes being unfairly downvoted.
I will tell you now. If I see ANY post down voted to $0 that is not spam, plagiarism, etc. it is noticeable. There is a difference between reducing rewards and removing rewards completely.
I think the $0 for something with a lot of votes is something we want to avoid seeing.
I've seen the up vote abuse as well. That can occur in many places and it definitely occurs with some powerful accounts and always has.
As to your two down votes of my post. I was fine with that. You didn't send me to $0 and ultimately the conversation we had was worth more to me than any amount of money the post may have received.
As to WHY I chose Lucy as I told you. It was the most blatant and obvious example. Anyone could look at it and see it. Yet it wasn't the only example.
That was the reason I chose it. It was undeniable what had been occurring for some time.
Is it rare? To be sent to $0 I hope so. Yet I haven't been back long enough to know. I do see some seemingly bot down voters that latch onto communities and topics they don't like as if they were leeches but they are low power votes and I see them, see who they are, "oh look it's sunsetjesus again" and I shrug and go on with my day.
While I am glad @trostparadox saw value in my post and even you did in hindsight. I did not mind your votes. If I'd been voted to $0 I might have minded but that's about it. It also would have made my own post a good example. :)
Speaking of the devil Mark here downvoted all my posts to zero and refuses to tell me why. I haven’t had a issues in 4 years mark. Answer me and at least tell me why so I can fix anything misunderstood or fix something I wasn’t aware of. Hive is a home for me. You don’t know what ur doing man. I don’t deserve this @themarkymark now answer me please. Be an adult. You did it again minutes ago so I know you are here. Answer me mark. I’m trying to be civil but you just downvoted a post minutes ago. I’m asking for simple answers please and a way to respectfully dispute whatever this is.
What a waste.
It's not a waste. I still read what you wrote. =p
I meant him saying he's going to leave Hive if his tribe doesn't work out.
Thanks, I'll check those both out!
And yeah, I do enjoy feeling part of Hive.
But in another sense, I await the day that Hive is just ~so incredibly functional~ that we can just focus on using it as a social platform or writing portfolio. And make tons of money too, of course. =p
THE INTERNET IS AN ATTENTION WAR
YOUR FOCUS IS YOUR MOST VALUABLE ASSET
USER ENGAGEMENT AND NUMBER OF REAL PAGE VIEWS IS WHAT GIVES HIVE AND ALL WEBSITES THEIR "VALUE"
Hello selective reader, no if all you do is cry about downvotes for a few months and how everything is broken and then use that attention as a way to justify rewards it doesn't make you worth any rewards from that attention.
I like how you left out literally the next in my quote that change the meaning of it
DRAMA = ATTENTION = GOOD FOR HIVE
Are you seriously suggesting that you downvote people for "drama"???????
I'm not someone who actively looks for drama, but if it's general drama then go ahead, but drama over Hive or Hive's reward system is getting quite old. I'd tell them to go somewhere else but we both know there is no where else like Hive.
In other words, you personally find it tiresome and annoying.
Are you perhaps familiar with the "MUTE" function?
A lot of people ignored haejin and even muted him while he roamed free taking a lot from the reward pool while providing close to 0 value in return quite similar to this case. You can't just ignore what's going on if you care about the rewardpool and it seems you guys do care quite a lot that this user continues to take from it or maybe you just miss his writing. Vote him with other coins or tip him, the latter can't be countered. Or, you know, buy more stake to counter the people downvoting him.
HAEJIN "added value" by STAKING-HIVE.
Whatever "reward pool" they received was in direct proportion to their STAKE.
As long as HAEJIN wasn't dumping HIVE onto exchanges (which could crash the market-price) then every HIVE token they "stole" from the "reward pool" was basically and essentially BURNED.
And everyone loves BURNING HIVE.
By hoovering up a bunch of HIVE (or STEEM) they are increasing scarcity, which drives up value.
IMAGESOURCE