Downvoted for the same reasons as the other overrewarded conspiracy posts, no engagement, no attempt at engagement from the author, no interest in this kind of content from the community after weeks of trending time due to instant big autovotes.
Downvoted for the same reasons as the other overrewarded conspiracy posts, no engagement, no attempt at engagement from the author, no interest in this kind of content from the community after weeks of trending time due to instant big autovotes.
The post has only been up for 2 hours. Is the window for engagement that small?
How do you know there's no interest in this kind of content? The metric of measuring content simply by the number of comments a post receives doesn't mean it has no value. How many posts has @corbettreport made in the last month, 2? Maybe 3?
@corbettreport has a large following and just because they don't advertise and promote the platform on a regular basis doesn't mean that he hasn't steered people to Hive/Steem over the years. In fact, he's one of the first content creators that talked about the platform in 2016 and how I found it. And I've certainly heard many other people say the same in his comments over the years.
At the same time, has also made content on promoting decentralized media over the years - from DTube, to Steemit, to other blockchain projects. The crypto space moves quickly and most people have a hard time keeping up with all the changes - DTube - DLive - Vimm - 3Speak - do you really expect content creators to be able to keep up with all of the developments on one platform? They're focused on research, and the quality of Corbett's work is exceptional. Would I prefer if there were more comments, of course, but saying that "The account brings no value to Hive" is just wrong.
https://www.corbettreport.com/dan-dicks-on-steemit-dtube-and-the-alt-media/
Not easy to keep track when there's 5 no engagement posts on trending by the same genre. Realized after this wasn't @dbag but low average engagement in general.
It's still trending, I didn't say it brings no value, my downvote is small.
If they have a big following outside and a good amount of followers here you should most likely expect them to average more engagement than the regular joe's, his other account doesn't seem to have that much engagement either yet earning a nice piece of the rewardpool. If people want to judge it in $ it's another thing.
If anything I countered some of the front-runners. Autovotes are fun and make Hive trending look great!
@acidyo - you have every right to downvote whatever you see fit on this decentralized platform. I know for a FACT, that you really care a lot about this platform and I do understand your frustration.
Just my perspective, not everything in the world and on this platform can be measured quantifiably with 1s and 0s. Quality (of course subjective) is very hard to define and often is a circular argument that I don't wish to have with you at this moment. But, quality is important and in the alternative media space, I think you would be hard pressed to find someone as thoughtful, fair, thorough, fact based and consistent as James Corbett.
I had just finished reading this post because I found it on Twitter when I saw your comment. James' editor Broc West had just Tweeted the link to this piece at Hive.blog.
This was a first. And I was happy to see that as it took a lot of convincing from myself and other users to get James and Broc to understand the Hive HF.
I believe I read some tweets about how people were getting turnoff the Twitter Hive campaigns because it was getting too shilly and how we need to start linking good content while promoting the chain. To me, this would be a good example of just that. I would also love it if @corbettreport can comment from time to time, it really would generate more engagement.
Now, I know you're a reasonable person. I do not think you're engaged in a censorship program on the chain. I do see your point.
As a gesture of goodwill, I'm going to remove all of my autovotes. I had always been manual up until this year as I was feeling burnt out. I will still continue to support the indy media but will do it manually and will be conscious of over-rewarded posts. If it's exceptionally good piece then I won't hesitate to support and promote it.
I really wish I could reply properly to this comment without it turning into a wall but I admitted I was wrong about said account and apologize and removed my dv. Maybe I can express it in a future post as lately the autovotes are even suppressing me from posting freely not knowing when or on what they're gonna land and take up trending. I respect your decision to go manual but I'd much rather you adjust the vote percentage or frequency on certain authors - although it's probably not you I should be directing that at to make for a better trending and fairer distribution.
To keep it short, biggest problem Hive faces today is a solution to rewarding manual curation more than auto voting and it's something that keeps me up at night wondering how to tackle it with my limited knowledge of the blockchain.
I have always agreed with your feelings about autovoting. I get it. Folks are busy, and support authors with those votes - or knowing the authors will trend, seek curation rewards with their bots.
The latter is a problem, and it's caused by curation rewards. Substituting financial incentives for the motivations that have always prompted folks to support speech has the effect of eliminating every other value for folks seeking financial value. Curation rewards destroy curation.
Another factor I consider just as important is that society is a purely human endeavor, and the infiltration of bots degrades humanity. It is easy to discount today because technology limits the impact of AI and our tools on our social interactions, but the rapid, even exponentially rapid, advance of technology may soon cause AI to subsume mere humans and our interactions that create society.
Please give that thought. Hive is a society. It isn't an ETF, or dividend bearing stock, in terms of speech. Financialization of curation has long been the blight that degrades trending, and curation rewards are the reason curation has been financialized. It's contrary to every stated purpose of free speech, society, and reduces the value of Hive to the community.
Decentralization of rewards on social media platforms is central to the potential of social media to benefit content creators for the benefits their content provides society. Curation rewards centralize stake on Hive, degrade curation, and reduce the benefits content creators deliver to society AND the value of the Hive platform to it's community.
Eliminating curation rewards and establishing the interest bearing savings accounts @edicted has proposed would resolve the concerns I have oft expressed about profiteering, better trending as a reflection of social interests, and benefit substantial stakeholders by providing more predictable returns on their stake via a mechanism more consistent with the investment industry.
Thanks for your robust and significant dedication to and hard work supporting Hive from your first day here.
Press for Truth is not affiliated with The Corbett Report in any way. And I regularly read @corbettreport's articles without commenting, and just FYI, not only have I heard him on multiple occasions bringing people to steem (before it was hive), I personally know someone who bought 10s of thousands of steem because he brought them here.
You are free to do what you want with your stake, but it may be prudent to not assume too much when you do.
I apologize for being wrong on this post, hard to keep up with everything but also hard to ignore autovotes taking up trending with the same authors no matter the content all the time.
Protecting this chain is a good instinct, and I'm glad there's stakeholders like you doing the dirty work getting it done.
The autovoters can be a big problem, and I don't know the solution to it, but in my opinion the breadth of experience coupled amount of research and time that goes into @corbettreport's articles and videos likely deserve more than HIVE can pay. Encouraging him more on this platform can only help, especially in an increasingly Orwellian world where people are looking for a place to freely discuss ideas.
It seem to me that this kind of post, were concerned people, try to play a role in the spread of information, that is crucial for the understanding of the current world situation, is being targeted here on hive.
I wander why is this?
The account brings no value to Hive.
I have Just seen the Twitter account and yes certainly he is bringing some value to our Hive.
I can certainly understand your frustrations.
Some people and some content bring hidden value to our Hive.
I don’t if you watch football but English premier league teams buys players from country X to bring attention From that particular country
Seriously, in my opinion you are mistaken, obviously i think accounts like this can only bring value to hive, because as censorship spreads across the internet, hive can be seen as a place were every opinion matters, were freedom of speech is granted.
And by the way how do you decide what brings value to hive?
How does someone reposting his content here, not leaving a single comment in 2 years, barely getting any comments unless someone tries to explain the reason to his downvote, getting unfair autovotes to trending even though no one cares about this content enough to engage or any of his followers have joined him on Hive to engage on his post and receive votes on the comments - bring any value to Hive?
I wish he'd engage more here, and I sometimes don't comment to engage him because I don't expect him to reply.
However, the comment section is a way to engage the audience he brings, and I do sometimes comment to expand on or express caveats to engage with them.
Unlike many, I came here because of censorship alone. It is the single feature of Hive that assures I will engage here rather than elsewhere. I literally don't use any other social media at all, and that's why.
When, not if, centralized platforms ban his content, Hive will be all that's left, and he will then be likely very engaged with his audience here, because he won't be on more populated platforms.
Free speech is going extinct everywhere else but Hive, and picking on early adopters who repost here (which is how most folks view downvotes of their content) has discouraged some already who might still be dropping their content here, where their audiences will increasingly come as censorship sours them on other platforms.
Even if folks with good content and large audiences only repost here without engagement now, as censorship increasingly recommends Hive, we might sooner get more of them to engage here by being less zealous regarding engagement here while they still have larger audiences elsewhere they are busy with.
did you just miss "hive can be seen as a place were every opinion matters, were freedom of speech is granted".
did you just use censorship against disagreement of rewards again?
Where?
what do you think makes me downvote these posts?
is it cause I want Hive to have an fair distribution to those using it properly and valuing what they earn
or is it cause I want to see it fail and get retaliation downvotes on my 2 active posts
I think your rules of engagement are not the correct ones. The way you are trying to protect the "hive" is making it difficult for individuals like this to consider moving in fully to this platform, and so they see it as a place were they can secure their material online. This is only my opinion on the matter.
This is actually the first/primary place he posts these newsletters. His videos are to his site first, then posted everywhere - but this written series is by email only, and the version on his site is only the intro, with a link to the HIVE post.
I already apologized for shoving this account with the same bunch as those other ones that get autovotes to trending.
Not trying to attack you or get an apology. I just wanted to shine some light on an aspect of the situation: he actually is actively using these to promote HIVE, via his personal site (which is FAR bigger than HIVE)