Technically that wouldn't be considered a 'fan base'. Much of that support comes from stakeholders who existed here before he arrived. Those votes roll in automatically and in this case blindly. There was actual content here before but he changed to this spam email template and those folks acting as 'promoters' haven't noticed yet, or they're simply voting just to get rewards and don't care, but I'm in no position to say what makes them tick. If he's not careful, soon people will notice and the well will dry up.
This platform gives all those displaced creators a place to grow a business and own every last detail. But all they do is what I said, and scrape pennies off the floor while micromanaging their lives to death, or using bots, which only devalue their product further. They're used to the centralized systems that basically hold their hand and do all the business end of things for them. Without big brother, they're lost.
If there was an instance of ACTUAL CONTENT here, I'd have no reason to feel ripped off and downvote. I don't want to see people yapping about how great the place is or whatever. That's so lame. Youtube became popular because people started sharing videos on Facebook. Those videos didn't mention Youtube. It was Tourette's Guy banging his head on chandeliers. The last thing I want to see here is someone advertising HIVE to the hive community. We already know we're awesome. If he's advertising this platform on other platforms, he's fracturing his market and being the idiot I'm talking about. He doesn't need to mention Hive in order to direct traffic to his business on Hive. He owns this space of his here and can market it however he wants.
I'm saying it would be beneficial if they posted their usual brand of content, as they do, exclusively in one profitable location, then simply allowing consumers to share on social media, as they do. And as I said these folks would benefit from utilizing social media to then direct traffic here(if here was where they chose to call home). This place offers both consumers and creators a far better deal than anywhere else. If when tipping or donating on Youtube, Google takes a percentage, the consumer is out money, and the creator is limited to the budget of their consumer. Tips and donations are sporadic whereas here the consumer can load up the wallet (they were spending the money anyway), then tip slowly and forever, all while seeing a potential return on money they were going to burn. And if they decide it's not for them, they can bloody well leave with potentially more money than they started with. No guarantees but if one is throwing the money away anyway, may as well put it to good use. These concepts, when sold to the consumer, encourage more paying consumption. And of course the creator is set up with a solid stream of revenue. If you had thousands of creators collecting disposable income from millions of consumers in this fashion, creators wouldn't be living of the peanuts they earn post to post, they be selling tokens that have to the potential to be increasing in value at a steady rate.
I've tried explaining this business model a million different ways. It's so goddamn new, people have trouble wrapping their heads around it. Typically, in society, consumers go broke and have to work more in order to support products. Now, it doesn't need to be like that.
Paying people to direct traffic away, all while they have no intention of ever drawing in outside money to their product, is ass backwards. This post is Hive throwing money away. Anyone with any large market and even an ounce of celebrity status brings value to their platform, as well as themselves. Now the consumer is included in that as well. This guy and these posts of his do not bring in any value. He sends it out the door and devalues the platform. And people like him do that everywhere. It's moronic. You don't need to be an f'n Hive cheerleader in order to setup a business here and earn money. Basic business sense. Make product; earn money. This isn't Twitter. Twitter is the paperboy. This platform is the paper. A free tool used to distribute content, is twitter. A tool used to direct traffic towards the MONEY. Hive isn't a tool used to direct traffic. Why are we paying someone to push traffic away when there are free tools available and do a much better job. This guy didn't even have 10 views on PeakD until I came here and pointed this mess out to others.
Then once they've established themselves on the main layer, they can advance to the second layer, make their own damn token with their own damn brand name stamped on it and progress even further down the road of decentralized media. Options with NFTs as well.
But you can't do that without first corralling consumers into one profitable pool...
I actually agree with most of what you say here. I see that all the populars are now placing links to many different alt platforms, and I think it is ultimately going to be 'too confusing' for the average users and mass adoption for any one them in particular.
I have lists of logins/passwords/keys/etc for so many different platforms now. I think that eventually there will be some kind of interface to link them all together, to help avoid situations like this. I personally think of it as 'milking' though more than advertising, since I would think we want all alternatives advertised somewhat. But content specific to this chain, I agree should be present.
Now, my more 'live and let live' approach, isn't going to work with all these 'curation' bots blasting upvotes in milliseconds to anything even remotely predicted as 'popular'. I think that is where a major part of the problem lies. Because for me personally, like you said, if the poster isn't interactive, I will stop supporting.. That will not stop the Bots from millisecond voting though.
The next HF intends to put the consumer first. Incentive to vote early on potentially popular posts with bots will be removed. The reward curve will encourage more votes to be placed on comments as well since the penalty of doing so will be gone.
And of course they're just milking rewards. And it's bringing my goddamn property value down. They're squandering the potential of decentralized media. And if they don't want it to work, they'll be out of job permanently.
That sounds like a great change. Anything to lower incentive for autobots is a step forward. Especially if we can do it without the 'downvote'. The downvote is killing noob potential. Impossible to explain the system to the mass in a short time. And the mass wants instant gratification. Market sense. If the bot problem was somewhat rectified, the bot posters like Dan's here, as I said wouldn't receive real human support. Come to think of it I might comment on one of his next posts addressing him and just see if he even bothers to address. That also might be a good way to show everyone "Hey this guy isn't even here", and the support starts falling or at least entices the poster to interact more.
Nobody is downvoting noobs unless they're being way too noobish and attempting to monetize content they did not create.
The auto votes aren't all bad. If I go to a concert, I'm paying at the door before experiencing the product. If I buy a subscription, I'm paying for stuff I've yet to consume. I just assume it will be good. That's normal in this business so if people want to vote automatically in that way, so they can support and then consume on their schedule, that's fine. It's not a blind vote in that sense. The auto vote was earned. Some massive auto votes are simply people acting as 'promoters'. They want to position the product in a better slot so it gets more views and more attention, and that increases the value of their percentage. Those exist in the real world, too.
But there's no sense denying some just don't care and only want to maximize rewards for themselves. We're still learning here...
And to be totally honest. Part of logic behind me downvoting was to encourage people to LOOK, so they can see what's happening. Anytime there's a car accident, people gawk.
Maybe some good will come out of this. But I've probably just wasted my fucking time. LOL
Oh no I mean that noobs that come to this blockchain won't grasp the 'downvote' function and will move on to something else. I've pointed people here before that instantly leave when they see the downvotes. The downvote abusers don't help matters.
Haha I must agree, that is exactly what made ME look here! But that is because I usually check to make sure it isn't downvote abuse which keeps pushing potentials away. In this case it is not abuse and I learned a lot more of your perspective and how much I agree with it. I'm not even going to throw upvotes to people anymore unless they are actually present on the chain. Thanks friend!
Much of that downvote abuse has ceased (I've been on the receiving end of it, wasn't happy, spoke up, got worse, then things got better). It works better now as a deterrent. Much like a security camera. Doesn't have to be used but people know it's there stops problems before they start. Things were way worse when nobody downvoted because it could potentially cut into their own personal profit. That's a problem we solved, there are still growing pains, but any clone platform I see attempting to do what we do without downvotes gets abused and falls apart within months. They might be ugly on the surface, but when used responsibly, are a necessity in this current climate of crypto.
And I'd like to thank you for taking the time to hear me out. Got off to a rocky start there, but so what, that's life.
And thank you for taking the time to spell it out in a way that makes so much more sense than the way others just jump attack anyone that questions the downvote :)