Hw's maintaining the database of abusive accounts, and having somebody managing that daily grind, is something I have not seen a viable alternative to on offer, yet.
Hive-DR has been the alternative built by 'the community', but we lost our dev at the fork and haven't really recovered from that.
We do have many of the small group of folks cut out for this type of work engaging through our discord server.
While some development is ongoing, as always, more funds would speed things up.
Bad curation is the root of this all.
Curators simply refuse to take the time to vet their votes, most are not suited to working in anti-abuse, don't have the talent nor temperament needed to face the fraudulent users' lies day after day.
I don't blame them, I'm not suited to pull the trigger on flags, either.
I think those that do take on this chore, collectively for us all, should be encouraged, but my stake is a drop in the bucket.
Hw's is not the only option, and hasn't been for a very long time.
For example, reallocate all of the common funds to DHF, and individual communities can then make proposals for their own reward funds, which they manage as they see fit.
Ganging up to improve rewards is the solution?
Better, imo, to crab bucket the governance, individually.
Let the second layer worry about tokens and their various distribution models.
The more hands holding hive the better.
You can see how the curators have fed their friends until they are fat enough to feed their's all while they collectively drove the majority of 2.4 million people away.
Plenty of accounts, lauded as 'par excellence' by the most powerful curators on the platform, with high reps and sub 2mv wallets, while those that do powerup and intend to stay are pushed off the rewards tail entirely by bad curation at the top.
20 accounts take 50+ percent of the pool, day after day, for years now.
Some accounts would be richer than god if the coin mooned.
Instead of the redshills and the bildaboogers running the planet it would be hive whales.
That isn't likely to happen, iyam.
Until it takes 1000 accounts to earn the first 50% of rewards, the coin is not nearly decentralized enough for me.
The database of abusive accounts has largely been corrupted into near worthlessness by @logic's poor logic regarding abuse. I see automated @spaminator downvotes on posts from some of my favorite (non-abusing) users.
Is there some way to automate that?
Or, maybe it's time to find new management?
That daily grind is something that requires a special temperament, but that temperament has to have somebody ride herd on it, or the power goes to its head, in my experience.
I'd like to see the Hivewatchers proposal unfunded until logic finds a job better suited for him. Abuse may increase temporarily but the void of anti-abuse won't be unfilled forever. I've long said that Hivewatchers needs to fire him, or Hive needs to fire Hivewatchers.
Who replaces him?
Not many willing to do that job, that I can see.
Can we get a proposal to manage the abusive account list from somebody capable of doing it?
I'm seeing more a lack of alternatives than any real support from 'the community'.
Absent a viable alternative I wouldn't be in favor of doing without, there is a real need in the hive for what is being done.
I do favor more active voices in the anti-abuse community, though.
There has been far too few of us for far too long, iyam.
There has been a lot of abuse by anti-abusers. It takes a special bird not to be feathered by it's flock.
Power corrupts.
I refute this. Rather, the corrupt seek power.
Your favourite users are arrogant, self-entitled abusers. Most of them are also as vulgar in their language and insults as you. You are now being muted.
Excellent! now the assless asshole won't know what butchered his sorry little ass. LoL
I had no idea I was an arrogant, self-entitled abuser.
There must be more to life.
Hahahaha, ¡Search & Learn!
Did you get this comment under the right person?
Says the arrogant asshole who will lose his sorry little ass very soon. Tsk Tsk
That may be, in that case, let's have an alternative competing proposal to consider.
I don't consider a free for all with no one putting in the time to identify and push back on systematic extraction (even if necessarily imperfectly to some degree or another) to be an attractive alternative.
People not liking it and raising objections basically goes with the territory. Everyone wants free reign to grab their piece of the pie without pushback, some reasonable some not. Too bad, free reign is a disaster.
And let's be clear about one thing. Regardless of whether you happen to like how it is being handled now, the vast majority of the (small in any case) user base is not affected. People can and do post and comment on all sorts of reasonable things and never get any attention or notice from anti-abuse efforts. We hear from the complainers, not the majority who are unaffected (except in so far as they benefit because the reward pool is preserved for them to some extent, with rampant abuse it wouldn't be)
@smooth
There are good people in hive watchers from the ones ive met.
having said that, my initial experiences with them made me feel targeted and actually made me concerned that I was being targeted by a criminal group or harassment. At the end of the day they are people, and fallible. Always will be.
From my personal experience, it strongly made me consider leaving the entire hive ecosystem. The problem I think lies in that the hivewatchers are not HR reps trained to deal with all different types of people and the way that one person expresses something can be totally misinterpreted by various types.
Ive long thought on this, since this happened to me about a year ago.
An adjustment of some form to the system is needed. After brainstorming on this for a year, my best idea is crowdsourcing it.
IF any person flags a post as spam, plagiarism etc. they submit proof of their claim if plagiarism and use citations, or explain their case in the situation of spam or farming. Then let everyone on hive scroll through these situations on a kind of news reel feed, and optionally, give people who perform the service of verification some reward in hive or hbd, they will review the post that was flagged and the case of the reporter and vote thumbs up or thumbs down, if thumbs down on any case reach some threshhold, say 30%, the post has no reduction of rewards. If 70% thumbs up and agree with case of reporter, then all hive rewards from post are removed and vote power can or can not be returned to voters up to u.
Maybe limit accounts to 10 or 20 verifications a day, and 3 reports a day. you can reward a reporter at end if case gets thumbed up.
maybe some type of proof of humanity can help, id do this even for free and im not in hivewatchers, a captcha, idk up to u.
ill think more on it. \
best wishes, there MUST be a better way, systemically
View or trade
BEER.Hey @forsakensushi, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @isnochys for you. Enjoy it!If you like BEER and want to support us please consider voting @louis.witness on HIVE and on HIVE Engine.
Thank you for your witness vote!
Have a !BEER on me!
To Opt-Out of my witness beer program just comment STOP below
I can't see not having a searchable, collective memory of the 'naughty' accounts and the details of that determination being open for appraisal.
How can we track large fraud schemes without this kind of database?
I continue to support @logic and hw's until a viable alternative is in place.
That's largely my view without getting into the weeds of how it works since I don't follow the specifics in detail. If there is an alternative making a pitch, I'll consider supporting it instead, or in addition to let them run side by side for a while and compare performance. If the alternative is nothing, then I don't support that.
I recall @themarkymark had a competing idea at one point but was shut down because the stakeholders thought it too excessive for the number of active users and favored HW instead.
This is the problem. Nothing will change because people like Logic know he won't be booted. It's basically holding the chain hostage for their supposed "indispensability".
There were days when HW had to pause operations due to "funding" and the chain didn't implode.
LOL ?
Curation rewards exchange pecuniary interest for those more valuable. Curating posts on the basis of how much financial reward they will create cannot but produce bad curation.
It is the elevation of financial value above far more valuable things to society that underlies this problem. AI is not the problem Hive faces. Were other values than money primary, no one would try to pass off AI content as their own work, for the reasons I stated earlier.
The ability to catch people posting AI content as their own will decrease precipitously, until it does not exist. Therefore the solution does not lie in that direction. Since the problems of spam, plagiarism, and scams also derive from the same principle, @hivewatchers has never been more than a kludge that reduced the symptoms of the actual problem through means that actually perpetuate the real problem, which is substituting money for more valuable rewards.
That is the underlying problem.
I blame laziness on the part of curators.
IF all of them observed a 10hbd soft cap on average content, the coin would spread farther.
I also blame crapitalism and its scarcity mindset.
We live in a world of abundance that we allow the crapitalusts to put behind a paywall.
On any given tuesday the workers could flip that on its head by working but refusing pay and to pay.
They make all the goods, why are they excluded from their share?
So we can have trillionaires?
People have been misled, for a long time.
It is not merely that we have been misled, because centralized industry has been necessary to advance technology from the Stone Age to the Space Age. However, decentralized means of production of the blessings of civilization are today the cutting edge of technological advance in all fields of industry. This is a new development, nascent, and the law of physics today mandates the paradigm shift from centralization to decentralization of production because the most advanced technology most increases productivity. Mass production, institutional control, hierarchical society, have gradually enabled technological advance because increased productivity benefited overlords with increased wealth derived from parasitizing collective production.
Decentralization eliminates parasitic losses, waste from mass production, and replaces mass produced cookie cutter crap with bespoke goods and services customized to consumer preferences. The massive overhead endemic to overlords parasitizing centralized manufacturing makes centralized production non-competitive with decentralized production. Decentralization eliminates the overlords themselves, and restores the egalitarian meritocracy human society necessarily was prior to the advent of agriculture, ushering in a new paradigm by enabling the blessings of civilization in such meritocracy.
We transcend politics, isms, and institutional power, even as we transcend localization to Earth itself and face the illimitable resources available across the apparently infinite universe. Regardless of any other factor, the ~2x increase in economic benefit to those that seize decentralized means of production inevitably leads to broad meritocratic dispersal of wealth exponentially multiplied by the raw resources becoming available.
I feel incredibly honored to be amongst the generation that creates this transcendence of crude barbarism and the initiation of incipient paradise that is becoming inevitable. I am sure my forebears have better earned such honor, and am confident my posterity will better comport themselves responsibly under such authority.
Edit: all we could have done, and did do, in history is to replace the old boss with new bosses. It is only the advent of decentralization mandated by the law of physics that enables transcendence of psychopathic overlords hell bent on dystopian totalitarian tyranny, and absolute freedom and inconceivable prosperity to be the legacy our posterity will inherit and use to create their felicity they will thereaft
I don't view the idea I described as ganging up, I view it as decentralizing the reward pool to the community level. Communities that are doing a good job* can pitch to Hive stakeholders to be subsidized to have a larger pool to administer among their members. Those who don't want to do that can still operate entirely as they like with second layer tokens alone.
* Good job meaning things such as active and growing user base, attracting attention and acclaim from outside Hive, not being overrun with spam and abuse, positive SEO stats, energizing real world Hive-related or Hive-sponsored activities and events, etc. This will all be compelling to get subsidized by Hive stakeholders and when aggregated to the community level are more feasible to scrutinize and be reasonably resistant to abuse.