You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: HiveForum KL Roundtable (Sun 19 OCT 2025): Improving DAO Spending, Accountability & ValuePlan Transparency

"Thanks to ola..."

What is ola?

The phat Hive wallets didn't come from creating content, but mostly from mining Steem early on, or from milking creators some other way, just like the real wealth from gold rushes didn't come from busting rocks but from selling shovels to miners, running brothels, or towns miners came into out of the cold when their sacks were phat.

Even so, without the mining, no one would have made anything. Social media is today the largest financial sector in global markets, exceeding manufacturing, mining (including petroleum), and defense. It is THE market to be in, and the FAGMANs (Fakebook, Apphell, Goolag, Microshaft, scAmazon, and Netfux) well prove that. However, all the FAGMANs are widely detested for their censorship and egregious data mining, both problems Hive can eliminate for it's users - as could have Steem. The avarice of the whales keeps them sucking ROI via extractive profiteering (none of them have blogs that meaningfully contribute to their stacks, and they are 99% of the downwards price pressure. They only profit when they sell) off the rewards pool, and because they maintain control of Hive governance by maintaining a bare majority of stake they will not risk that ROI for far greater capital gains they might attain by allowing Hive to grow, because that would risk their control of governance.

However, the lure of the $M's in the DHF has proved too strong for them to resist, and sucking it dry without getting caught committing fraud is more difficult if GAAP are implemented for all DHF expenditures - and that is why not one mention of standard double entry bookkeeping was even made at their round table.

They keep this shit up they're going to get caught, and that could well end Hive and the potential for it to implement the initial vision and potential for censorship resistance and a media platform owned by the creators that is not vulnerable to the corrupt influence of advertisers. All we'd have left then is Blurt!, and that has it's own whales and governance issues.

Proper search could greatly improve the utility of evergreen content in our back catalogs, and, as I pointed out, monetizing that content on a second layer is entirely doable, which would incentivize it's creators to promote it across the global market, and assist Hive in recapturing it's market position and outcompete lame FAGMAN platforms. The censorship has to end though.

Sort:  

The avarice of the whales keeps them sucking ROI via extractive profiteering (none of them have blogs that meaningfully contribute to their stacks, and they are 99% of the downwards price pressure. They only profit when they sell) off the rewards pool, and because they maintain control of Hive governance by maintaining a bare majority of stake they will not risk that ROI for far greater capital gains they might attain by allowing Hive to grow, because that would risk their control of governance.

That's exactly what's up.

I disagree with your stance on downvotes, and last time I checked Netflix wasn't social media, but... hey...

Our whales are too busy protecting their source of income; stepping over dollars to pick up pennies.

And oh how much I hate all the marketing people and how anyone could fall for their fluff talk.

Meanwhile, they now demand bills and checks and accounting from whom?
Developing software just takes time and work.

Every one of their friends (including their friends’ moms) had a go at it and now that it all is running dry, we get a round table.

Felixxx I must be honest, I get your frustration. But frustration won't get us further. Ofcourse you are free to vent this, right. Beyond this frustration (how i see it) would you have any constructive feedback or ways how you would see this improved or fixed?

would you have any constructive feedback or ways how you would see this improved or fixed?

Yes, I do and I very clearly articulate that in my blog posts. - have been for years.


What you could do, personally:
Start voting, bro! (for content)
I DMed you about this many years ago and you just ignored me.


I want to make this very clear:
Love what you are doing with Hivefest. If we spent 1mio HBD on the event itself, I wouldn't mind.
Also: You are no whale.


btw: Did you take part in the decision to name this thing Hive?


Why (out of all people) did you have to stick your head out for this? 😔
I can't be mad at you.

thanks for your comments. I have not been very active on Hive for a few years beyond maintenance of my servers, as I was fulltime overtime building a house. As I am slowly done with that I dabble with what is next in my life. Hive has given me much and I love to give back to hive.

I would not want to go to much into my personal behaviour or response of why I do or not do certain things. As it would take away too much about the core discussion at hand:

  • voting: busy to read all content and be a curator. Ok could put more into voting trails or curator teams. Sorry I have ignored you about this, don't take this personally. I am bad at dms and especially if I don't catch it via a notification it might be lost.
  • thx for Hivefest: Here I am dabbling with that spending on "a party for the happy few", although this year actually saw a great outcome imho with especially connections between local communities through ChainCulture and this meetup.
  • No I am no whale but I've vested 10 years in this platform thus it became part of my identity (like yours too :D)
  • The name was not propped up by me, I did the logo. It was one of the names coined during pre-fork times and resounded best with participants in group chats that time.
  • still open to read a concise summary of what you want fixed, specifically about the DHF spending which could be implemented. Note there are already voting structures in place and a return proposal.
  • Re: I can't be mad at you: You may :) But: I'm not the only one sticking my head out for this. As mentioned in a comment elsewhere on this page: During past meetups over the summer at several (mainly) EU events (from my side at least) we have been discussing this stuff between one-on-one conversations. The idea to do this meeting is as we were still all one-on-one touching on this subject during HiveFest week, idea arose to meet with 12 or so of us, to share the voices between a larger group.
    Where:
    -- "we" is random Hive-people attending these events
    -- "this stuff" is DHF spending, valueplan spending, attracting businesses, being more structured in a still decentralised way, accountability, criteria.

Ok could put more into voting trails or curator teams.

omg please don't!

I strongly recommend you read about the Stewards of Gondor. That program required no disbursement of funding at all. It was entirely done through modest delegations of ~5k. The Stewards were charged simply with upvoting content they liked, and cheaters that circlejerked or voted their own content (or their bots) were easily and quickly undelegated without substantial financial loss - because they were not given a plug nickel to steal.

It worked great and that is why it was never actually enacted, because it encouraged creators and made them more difficult to flag off the platform. That is exactly what we need to do to improve user retention and grow Hive.

Are you suggesting we should go back to draw funds from the posting rewards pool?
What a terrible idea...

I do not like delegations of that kind; It's why the content is so bad.

"...share the voices between a larger group."

It is a common danger to be a victim of groupthink in institutional settings. In order to prevent that it is necessary to include people you don't generally converse with, to seek out and specifically include dissidents, those you disagree with, and particularly those that do not share the viewpoint common to your bubble.

It is notable that in science, every major change has come from outsiders, dissidents, and those that gatekeepers sought to silence. A patent clerk from Germany that barely passed university maths disproved Newton's physics, that had stood for centuries. Perhaps if physicists had courted more dissidents cosmology would have improved centuries prior.

Hive isn't as fundamental as physics. Hive can't last for centuries with the execrable user retention it has now. It should be very obvious that whales do not have the same interests as new users, so the mechanisms and principles they will propose and support won't reflect onboards and their needs. If you want Hive to grow - and unless it grows it will die - I strongly recommend asking users that fled the platform what it would take to get them back. I think I know what you'd learn from asking them, but I'd prefer if ya'll asked 1000 of them and learned it from them.

Loading...