We ill be issuing a statement. I’m sad to see that you did it this way and did not send us an email to pre warn us about the article. We are running fast and building on the fly in order to try to cater For the new market of disenfranchised creators who are struggling on traditional platforms like YouTube. We cannot do tos updates regularly. You have made a good point and we will be rectifying this issue with a statement and tos adjustment soon. But I think that it is clear that this article generates some negative attention where I think is not due and in order to maintain journalistic integrity, such blogs should be released with ‘we have contacted the threespeak team for official reply via email’ but no such opportunity was given. Alternatively, this issue could have been easily resolved by simply pointing out the issue in our discord or telegram group. I hope that once we release our statement, you will be updating thre content of this blog to reflect the update do situation, or at least referring future readers of this blog (at the top of this blog) with a link to our blog which corrects the issues raised here. It will be positive for all on the chain. Thanks
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I’m not a journalist, I’m a Steem user who saw misrepresentation being done by not only the site, but your team members.
I tried to reach out, as I’ve done many times before, and was blocked.
Nothing in this post is negative, it’s literally just explaining what is happening. In the post, as well as many comments, I state that I think the core vision and goals are great and something I support.
On the opposite side stating I am trolling is quite negative, and an attempt to negate the things I’ve brought up. Not to mention what is being done behind the scenes, but I expected that much.
Improve the communication, stop using false claims to create a buzz and of course I will update this post with whatever is needed, including linking to new (improved) information provided by your team.
Very good. We will also be releasing already available video presentations done weeks prior to your claim that we are purposefully doing false advertising / purposefully misrepresenting (which is not a fair summation here at all) in which both dan and I present threespeak to large crowds and clearly state that decentralised storage in in our future roadmap. I refute the claim by you that we were doing false advertising. Ok tos needed updating, fair enough, and we will be rectifying shortly. If you had done your research you might well have seen these videos and your content might have given us the benefit of the doubt while asking for clarification instead of accusing us of misrepresentation. But please just drop a question in our discord group in future (it’s available to all). This issue would have been resolved immediately, without any potential For hard feelings or animosity between us, our stake holders, or members of the community.
That’s great Matt, but one video “done weeks before your claim” doesn’t really change what has been actively been being said.
It’s easy to solve - but seriously maybe you and your team need to get on the same page... as saying “we are working on a future decentralized storage option” is much different than what has been being said. If you can’t see that, I’m not sure what to say.
As far as your stake holders, or community members .. don’t worry, this place is still scared to stand up to anyone who has stake and uses it to get what they want.. so your project will be just fine, as you know.
3speak is a great project with a great mission, don’t ruin its potential for a short term win made possible by fake empty hype shills. It doesn’t need that to succeed, your original idea was brilliant enough.
Can you show me examples of the threespeak team purposefully mis representing that we are a currently a decentralised storage system for video. No such technology even exists. No such instruction ever came from threespeak management. And as far as I am now aware, none of our team have been Mis representing threespeak as a decentralised storage system for video content
That is subjective, is it not? How could I know if anyone was purposely attempting to misrepresent?
What I can show is an ongoing narrative that alludes to it.. and then when people go to look at 3speak’s website, what do they find? A faq that says it’s stored on chain. It’s not shocking why many of your users are now running with that narrative as well.
Here are a few examples-
*3speak also doesn’t store videos in a decentralized way, which was her question.
Someone points that out...
And they get a response, which does also include a link to your video roadmap, which focuses on the goal of being a DAO.. it doesn’t actually answer the question at hand though or say what it does currently or how it works (which again, is what people are asking)
So you only use that for speed? And have a decentralized back end? Or “still being built” means you don’t?
Again, future plans are kick ass.. but answering a question with what may happen in the future doesn’t actual answer the question of what it is right now.
*3speak also uses big backer centralized storage
What does “decentralization of storage also incentivized” mean? There is no decentralized storage currently.
John joined lbry due to “decentralization” and you know.. He should join 3speak too
And when anyone who reads any of this.. which does allude to the idea of it being a “decentralized alternative to YouTube” and goes to 3speak.online.. they see this
What exactly does that tell them?
There are tons of other tweets like this, these are the few I went to grab quickly. Your users are now taking this message and running with it.. and how could they not know that is how it worked?
I’m not trying to be an ass here, but quite frankly I’m a bit confused how you don’t see the issue tbh.
As I said, I think the project idea and the current set up is pretty great.
You have a powerful message, great UI/UX etc.. it just seems irresponsible to not only not have a back up storage but also to advertise your project to individuals currently being deleted elsewhere as somewhere that that could never happen.. when you and I both know that with the current set up that is also what can happen on 3speak.
Yes, very subjective. There was a time hat we stored on sia. But it was disabled based on wehmoen’s comments here Other than this, there is a clear mis understanding here which could have been easily resolved if bought to our attention in our discord. Please do this in future, or at least try to. It will save a lot of valuable time and effort on both our parts. We will issue our correction blog and update our tos based on the outcome
Are you telling me that no one from your team was aware how the project was being represented?
And that I should have just come to discord to tell you and all would have been resolved?
I look forward to the more clear communication and will edit my post when it’s done, but acting as if this was all just a big misunderstanding seems like a cop out, not gonna lie.
I disagree.