How is the progress pretty slow on STEMGeeks? It seems to be working pretty well. What metric are you using to determine progress is slow?
Both projects focussing on the exact same niche. Both projects acting on same or similar tags. Why not join hands and work together? The network of the StemSocial team is large. The monetary system is setup by StemGeeks. I can't see why this shall not become one and the same service, and why the proposal (maybe with some adjustments) can't be funded? Or am I missing something here?
They may use some of the same tags, but they are very different projects. STEMSocial focuses on Journalist / professional quality content, and as far as I can see mostly science.
STEMGeeks is more amateur and hobbyist friendly and no particular focus on any of the STEM topics, although I am personally more Technology focused.
How is the progress pretty slow on STEMGeeks? It seems to be working pretty well. What metric are you using to determine progress is slow?
I believe the UI is very basic and shall get additional features, like the search feature and more I'm talking about in my post. I believe PeakD like, or LEO like UI's will attract more users, also in the STEM side of things.
STEMGeeks is more amateur and hobbyist friendly and no particular focus on any of the STEM topics, although I am personally more Technology focused.
I really don't see why these two focus areas can't be merged. At some stage I think we can breakup in all sort of services and communities, but we need to get to a critical mass. Yes, we have lots of chain users, but just a handful of active users. I believe we shall work as much as possible together, grow the user base and when we reach critical mass, we can further decentralise and breakout sub-genres, topics and what not.
I believe the UI is very basic and shall get additional features, like the search feature and more I'm talking about in my post. I believe PeakD like, or LEO like UI's will attract more users, also in the STEM side of things.
There is really no budget for such a thing, it's a big project to rebuild the site (would cost $10,000-20,000). With no revenue stream, really can't justify such a cost, especially since Hive doesn't have a lot of people writing about STEM topics to begin with.
I really don't see why these two focus areas can't be merged. At some stage I think we can breakup in all sort of services and communities, but we need to get to a critical mass. Yes, we have lots of chain users, but just a handful of active users. I believe we shall work as much as possible together, grow the user base and when we reach critical mass, we can further decentralise and breakout sub-genres, topics and what not.
We both have totally different goals and very different projects.
There is really no budget for such a thing, it's a big project to rebuild the site (would cost $10,000-20,000). With no revenue stream, really can't justify such a cost, especially since Hive doesn't have a lot of people writing about STEM topics to begin with.
I understand costs involved. Some high power users seem to vote for the StemSocial proposal. Not enough, but when you (and your team) and the StemSocial team work together, create a joint proposal, the funds could very well be coming from our own proposal system. I know I will vote for it... though my vote is not worth a lot, I know. But I'll do all my best to get the number of votes required.
Added to that, the HIVE based STEM shall be promoted in various ways. Am not a marketing specialists, but some other teams have gained lots of experience already with marketing like the Leo team or the Splinterlands team. In collaboration with them and maybe others in the community and from other dApps in our ecosystem, this could be given a nice boost.
We both have totally different goals and very different projects.
In the 'detail' this maybe true. Have you seen the content from the other team? Not so much different. But I have an outsiders view, which makes it easier to see the simularities.
You know? I curate music side of HIVE every single day and in that area I hate to see soo many HIVE communities. I fully understand why, all communities have a different angle. But when I put on my helicopter hat, I see a super fragmented music section at HIVE, and because of that, this section is harming itself from growth. Because of such fragmentation, I even see lots of music post not posted into any community. The users don't know where to go. I try to help and give information and support. But even that doesn't seem to help a lot. Though I get some positive results here and there 🙃🎶
I understand costs involved. Some high power users seem to vote for the StemSocial proposal. Not enough, but when you (and your team) and the StemSocial team work together, create a joint proposal, the funds could very well be coming from our own proposal system. I know I will vote for it... though my vote is not worth a lot, I know. But I'll do all my best to get the number of votes required.
I'm not sure I really agree with much of what is being funded, most of it isn't being used by many people and they are dumping it on Binance.
I don't think STEMSocial even works right now. Last few times I have checked it was down and the project leads said they are too busy to work on it.
When I built STEMGeeks, I didn't really know that much about SteemSTEM (the name at the time) and tribes were very new. There was no Hive communities either. I wanted to encourage more STEM related content here.
There was no Hive communities either. I wanted to encourage more STEM related content here.
I very much appreciate that :) It has been a bit of time ago I've last spoken with the StemSocial guys as well. Though they may be a bit quiet now, that doesn't mean they can be woken up again?
I'm not sure I really agree with much of what is being funded, most of it isn't being used by many people and they are dumping it on Binance.
Yea, that's maybe true, but that doesn't mean a STEM project could not be funded? And maybe not a lot of funds are required initially anyway.
I realise, when building a UI from scratch, is a lot of work. But somehow the LEO team seem to have used code from PeakD before their recent UI upgrade (and maybe they still using some PeakD code, I dont know, but their previous UI was very much similar to PeakD). PeakD guys said at one point in time, they plan to open source. Since they are funded right now from the proposal system, I would assume this became a reality. Not that I like PeakD UI the best, but it has lots of features to make the STEM experience better, build right into it. Anyway, as I mentioned at the end of my post, I'm a problem solver as well as someone who can dream... I maybe dreaming now just right after Hivefest, but it give me lots of enthusiasm and energy to try to help and support where I can.
I realise, when building a UI from scratch, is a lot of work. But somehow the LEO team seem to have used code from PeakD before their recent UI upgrade (and maybe they still using some PeakD code, I dont know, but their previous UI was very much similar to PeakD).
First off, Leo is not using any Peakd code although they used some design ideas from Peakd.
Leo is able to do it because Khal took a big risk but in the end he has a unique advantage no one can mimic. Finance is a common theme with everyone here on Hive. Every other tribe is a tiny niche out of a small community. Finally everything Khal does is on topic with the tribe. For example if I created wrapped STEM token very few would be interested as STEMGeeks is nothing to do with crypto and won’t get the same interest and excitement. It also makes it uniquely hard to create interest and revenue.
Nope, not at all. I do believe we need the downvote button for any account to be able to use without agreements with others.
But I think we could do with the possibility to remove an account, or block it completely. It shall be used with great care since I do not want HIVE to be seen as or become a platform of censoring, but some accounts just needs to be blocked indefinitely and some other temporarily. A multi dimensional governance model could handle such function. Shall it be based on 20 accounts to nuke an account? Maybe not, maybe it shall be based on 100 accounts, I don't know.
We can think of using this multi dimensional consensus model for other things as well. Maybe we get another layer of witnesses to oversee the activities of the chain witnesses and give their value to each individual witness based on a defined set of parameters? This will help the community, all those who don't know anything about witnesses, to determine whom they will give their votes. Kinda like the parliament and senate in political systems. If need be, we create a third layer, and forth. I don't know.
I just got inspired by this extra dimension of governance used by BLURT while I'm also thinking of all the issues we see with abuse in general and the amount of users that never change their witness votes and even when they want to change, they have hard times to determine who to give their vote to.
We are still a small community, but what if we are 100 times larger? We need mechanism more than we have today to make sure we 1) grow 2) will not get out of control. Multi dimensional consensus based governance could help these to aspects and make everything more decentralised and 'democratic' in a practical sense.
I have no solution myself yet, I just see opportunities. I truly believe we shall start debating the fact we could do something with re-using the consensus system we have for our base layer, to implement a multi dimensional governance system instead of the (more or less) single dimension we have around our chain.
Note that 1) I do like Hivewatchers as well and trust these guys 2) Hivewatchers is a centralised team, therefore not following the ideals and rules of decentralisation. Do we like to keep it like this for the long term? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe we need more Hivewatchers teams working independently? Maybe we implement a governance system that can nuke Hivewatchers and simiar accounts/teams when they become abusive? Maybe we shall implement a governance system for all those who feel they are falsely accused by Hivewatchers and leave the final judgement to such decentralised governance system rather then to a central team? Even the blacklists are centralised implementations at the moment. Maybe the governance system shall drive and decide for who gets onto the blacklist?
Well, I'm glad we see eye to eye on keeping downvotes. I don't really like to think about changes in how content censorship should work with those off the table which is why I don't like Blurt.
However, I do see value in having a system that can more easily remove extreme content. I'm not a fundamentalist libertarian either and obviously, some content is completely unwanted here. This level of censorship would require a hard fork to implement.
You are right that there is no real safe way to give anyone the keys to that. One safe way could be to keep a list of stuff that is to be permanently removed and do away with it every hard fork (give them 30 days minimum to appeal). The list could be made public and a voting system could be in place with people being able to delegate their vote. I would still recommend some control over the list. For example certain nomination requirements and certain people with authority to manage it.
I think giving people 30 days to appeal would buy them time if they are falsely accused by hive watchers. It will give plenty of time to save the content to republish if they clear their name after.
Another problem I've always thought about is when the abusers get away with months of abuse before getting caught. There is no whitelist to start publishing and the cost to create a new account is at most a couple of dollars which can easily be recovered in a single post.
Perhaps a way to verify new users would be great, as well as a trust score. This could all be done via 3rd party and completely optional. It would be of great use to the larger curators who actually care about the content they vote for. The way I envision this is we vote for a 3rd party side account for new users until they are verified and trusted. I think anyone serious about producing content could wait a couple of weeks until the rewards are handed over and then trust is established.
Too many people are milking the system. They are hard to deal with. The corruption wasn't fixed with Hive. There doesn't seem to be much motivation or enthusiasm to clean it up. The price of Hive and overall market cap isn't as good as it ought to be.
I have my moments. The intention was to go with a kinda short form, and then you've seen what happened... Guess I wrote this when my 2 cells didn't fight but worked together for once 😎
You take it easy coming days, too many stressful days ahead of us in 2021 anyways 😉
Congratulations @edje! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You received more than 60000 upvotes. Your next target is to reach 65000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the wordSTOP
Points Boosting refund to @edje! 🤓 Due to one of these reasons: 1. Post is not published via Ecency. 2. Post is already curated by our team. 3. Post is not curated by our curators within 24 hours. 4. Post might be too old post, try more recent content. 5. Author already received vote in last few hours, try again later. Install Android: https://android.ecency.com, iOS: https://ios.ecency.com mobile app or desktop app for Windows, Mac, Linux: https://desktop.ecency.com Learn more: https://ecency.com Join our discord: https://discord.me/ecency
How is the progress pretty slow on STEMGeeks? It seems to be working pretty well. What metric are you using to determine progress is slow?
They may use some of the same tags, but they are very different projects. STEMSocial focuses on Journalist / professional quality content, and as far as I can see mostly science.
STEMGeeks is more amateur and hobbyist friendly and no particular focus on any of the STEM topics, although I am personally more Technology focused.
Thanks for your quick response.
I believe the UI is very basic and shall get additional features, like the search feature and more I'm talking about in my post. I believe PeakD like, or LEO like UI's will attract more users, also in the STEM side of things.
I really don't see why these two focus areas can't be merged. At some stage I think we can breakup in all sort of services and communities, but we need to get to a critical mass. Yes, we have lots of chain users, but just a handful of active users. I believe we shall work as much as possible together, grow the user base and when we reach critical mass, we can further decentralise and breakout sub-genres, topics and what not.
There is really no budget for such a thing, it's a big project to rebuild the site (would cost $10,000-20,000). With no revenue stream, really can't justify such a cost, especially since Hive doesn't have a lot of people writing about STEM topics to begin with.
We both have totally different goals and very different projects.
I understand costs involved. Some high power users seem to vote for the StemSocial proposal. Not enough, but when you (and your team) and the StemSocial team work together, create a joint proposal, the funds could very well be coming from our own proposal system. I know I will vote for it... though my vote is not worth a lot, I know. But I'll do all my best to get the number of votes required.
Added to that, the HIVE based STEM shall be promoted in various ways. Am not a marketing specialists, but some other teams have gained lots of experience already with marketing like the Leo team or the Splinterlands team. In collaboration with them and maybe others in the community and from other dApps in our ecosystem, this could be given a nice boost.
In the 'detail' this maybe true. Have you seen the content from the other team? Not so much different. But I have an outsiders view, which makes it easier to see the simularities.
You know? I curate music side of HIVE every single day and in that area I hate to see soo many HIVE communities. I fully understand why, all communities have a different angle. But when I put on my helicopter hat, I see a super fragmented music section at HIVE, and because of that, this section is harming itself from growth. Because of such fragmentation, I even see lots of music post not posted into any community. The users don't know where to go. I try to help and give information and support. But even that doesn't seem to help a lot. Though I get some positive results here and there 🙃🎶
I'm not sure I really agree with much of what is being funded, most of it isn't being used by many people and they are dumping it on Binance.
I don't think STEMSocial even works right now. Last few times I have checked it was down and the project leads said they are too busy to work on it.
When I built STEMGeeks, I didn't really know that much about SteemSTEM (the name at the time) and tribes were very new. There was no Hive communities either. I wanted to encourage more STEM related content here.
I very much appreciate that :) It has been a bit of time ago I've last spoken with the StemSocial guys as well. Though they may be a bit quiet now, that doesn't mean they can be woken up again?
Yea, that's maybe true, but that doesn't mean a STEM project could not be funded? And maybe not a lot of funds are required initially anyway.
I realise, when building a UI from scratch, is a lot of work. But somehow the LEO team seem to have used code from PeakD before their recent UI upgrade (and maybe they still using some PeakD code, I dont know, but their previous UI was very much similar to PeakD). PeakD guys said at one point in time, they plan to open source. Since they are funded right now from the proposal system, I would assume this became a reality. Not that I like PeakD UI the best, but it has lots of features to make the STEM experience better, build right into it. Anyway, as I mentioned at the end of my post, I'm a problem solver as well as someone who can dream... I maybe dreaming now just right after Hivefest, but it give me lots of enthusiasm and energy to try to help and support where I can.
First off, Leo is not using any Peakd code although they used some design ideas from Peakd.
Leo is able to do it because Khal took a big risk but in the end he has a unique advantage no one can mimic. Finance is a common theme with everyone here on Hive. Every other tribe is a tiny niche out of a small community. Finally everything Khal does is on topic with the tribe. For example if I created wrapped STEM token very few would be interested as STEMGeeks is nothing to do with crypto and won’t get the same interest and excitement. It also makes it uniquely hard to create interest and revenue.
Are you suggesting we do away with downvotes?
If we adopt the blurt model of dealing with abuse, I'll announce my departure from this platform.
This does not require a hardforking solution.
I like hivewatchers and more funding to them, but the black lists, and perhaps some more tools are good enough.
Nope, not at all. I do believe we need the downvote button for any account to be able to use without agreements with others.
But I think we could do with the possibility to remove an account, or block it completely. It shall be used with great care since I do not want HIVE to be seen as or become a platform of censoring, but some accounts just needs to be blocked indefinitely and some other temporarily. A multi dimensional governance model could handle such function. Shall it be based on 20 accounts to nuke an account? Maybe not, maybe it shall be based on 100 accounts, I don't know.
We can think of using this multi dimensional consensus model for other things as well. Maybe we get another layer of witnesses to oversee the activities of the chain witnesses and give their value to each individual witness based on a defined set of parameters? This will help the community, all those who don't know anything about witnesses, to determine whom they will give their votes. Kinda like the parliament and senate in political systems. If need be, we create a third layer, and forth. I don't know.
I just got inspired by this extra dimension of governance used by BLURT while I'm also thinking of all the issues we see with abuse in general and the amount of users that never change their witness votes and even when they want to change, they have hard times to determine who to give their vote to.
We are still a small community, but what if we are 100 times larger? We need mechanism more than we have today to make sure we 1) grow 2) will not get out of control. Multi dimensional consensus based governance could help these to aspects and make everything more decentralised and 'democratic' in a practical sense.
I have no solution myself yet, I just see opportunities. I truly believe we shall start debating the fact we could do something with re-using the consensus system we have for our base layer, to implement a multi dimensional governance system instead of the (more or less) single dimension we have around our chain.
Note that 1) I do like Hivewatchers as well and trust these guys 2) Hivewatchers is a centralised team, therefore not following the ideals and rules of decentralisation. Do we like to keep it like this for the long term? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe we need more Hivewatchers teams working independently? Maybe we implement a governance system that can nuke Hivewatchers and simiar accounts/teams when they become abusive? Maybe we shall implement a governance system for all those who feel they are falsely accused by Hivewatchers and leave the final judgement to such decentralised governance system rather then to a central team? Even the blacklists are centralised implementations at the moment. Maybe the governance system shall drive and decide for who gets onto the blacklist?
Well, I'm glad we see eye to eye on keeping downvotes. I don't really like to think about changes in how content censorship should work with those off the table which is why I don't like Blurt.
However, I do see value in having a system that can more easily remove extreme content. I'm not a fundamentalist libertarian either and obviously, some content is completely unwanted here. This level of censorship would require a hard fork to implement.
You are right that there is no real safe way to give anyone the keys to that. One safe way could be to keep a list of stuff that is to be permanently removed and do away with it every hard fork (give them 30 days minimum to appeal). The list could be made public and a voting system could be in place with people being able to delegate their vote. I would still recommend some control over the list. For example certain nomination requirements and certain people with authority to manage it.
I think giving people 30 days to appeal would buy them time if they are falsely accused by hive watchers. It will give plenty of time to save the content to republish if they clear their name after.
Another problem I've always thought about is when the abusers get away with months of abuse before getting caught. There is no whitelist to start publishing and the cost to create a new account is at most a couple of dollars which can easily be recovered in a single post.
Perhaps a way to verify new users would be great, as well as a trust score. This could all be done via 3rd party and completely optional. It would be of great use to the larger curators who actually care about the content they vote for. The way I envision this is we vote for a 3rd party side account for new users until they are verified and trusted. I think anyone serious about producing content could wait a couple of weeks until the rewards are handed over and then trust is established.
Too many people are milking the system. They are hard to deal with. The corruption wasn't fixed with Hive. There doesn't seem to be much motivation or enthusiasm to clean it up. The price of Hive and overall market cap isn't as good as it ought to be.
Holy Gamoly, I am living under a rock !! Darkest Africa indeed. I did not even know HiveFest was on in this Covid times.
Some great points and well articulated (for a person with few brain cells {grin}) post @edje
I will read it again with more focus once the alcohol haze has subsided.
🤣🤣🤣 {LOL....LOL....LOL}
I have my moments. The intention was to go with a kinda short form, and then you've seen what happened... Guess I wrote this when my 2 cells didn't fight but worked together for once 😎
You take it easy coming days, too many stressful days ahead of us in 2021 anyways 😉
Congratulations @edje! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPDo not miss the last post from @hivebuzz:
Points Boosting refund to @edje! 🤓
Due to one of these reasons:
1. Post is not published via Ecency.
2. Post is already curated by our team.
3. Post is not curated by our curators within 24 hours.
4. Post might be too old post, try more recent content.
5. Author already received vote in last few hours, try again later.
Install Android: https://android.ecency.com, iOS: https://ios.ecency.com mobile app or desktop app for Windows, Mac, Linux: https://desktop.ecency.com
Learn more: https://ecency.com
Join our discord: https://discord.me/ecency