Who Will Down Vote Haejin After the Fork

inertia (73) · 6 years ago

$0.98

12 votes

alexvanaken (66) · 6 years ago

LOL...

$0.00

theguruasia (67) · 6 years ago

@whatsup,
Actually I ma a big fan of @traf, and honestly I like how he is doing at STEEM blockchain! Yeah it's self voting, but unlike haejin or bernie he behave well and friendly! I don't think he might not go for revenge calls on your actions and I know down voting pool and bad idea and those whales could rage quit people based on their favoritism! I mean we will be like middle of world war 3, that every one has to take a side to stay alive!

Cheers~

$0.15

justineh (71) · 6 years ago

Yes much better to rape the rewards pool and be nice about it. As long as they are nice, who cares right 😄

$0.00

eonwarped (68) · 6 years ago

There's a big difference though. In this scenario and all others like it, free downvote or not, he would be able to smash anyone that he chooses. The thing is, it's quite more productive for him to target the other posts that are high because that will increase his return more. That's if the harassment is at the level of a pin prick. And if it isn't, well, he certainly isn't going to be able to stop everyone that targets him. But anyway... We'll see. I plan to exhaust all my flags in those directions.

$0.07

abh12345 (76) · 6 years ago

Could we see more accounts return to the exceedingly late self-vote, or is there something in place to counter these? My memory is hazy on how the 6th day voting plays out as far as up and downvotes - if yours isn't, i'd like to hear your thoughts.

$0.05

eonwarped (68) · 6 years ago

Exceedingly late self vote is as possible now as it was before. That linear degradation of power within the last couple hours. Though interestingly, because downvoting larger rshare posts is more effective, it could help with this kind of effort. Meaning, even though the later you downvote here the less rshares it casts, it can still make an impact, depending on timing. I am making a few assumptions about how it works but I believe it works that way. Have to check.

abh12345 (76) · 6 years ago

Thanks for the reply. I can see an increase in late self-votes arriving but it's good to know that a late down-vote would hold more weight due to the proposed curve tweak, down-votes would hold more weight - Eyes peeled then? :)

$0.00

abitcoinskeptic (73) · 6 years ago

Wow. I forgot that whales may start downvoting people just to increase their own rewards. ♡♡♡

Posted using Partiko Android

baah (61) · 6 years ago

As was mentioned by traf and others, the first step is free downvotes, the next one is delegating the free downvotes so they can be used effectively.

$0.07

justineh (71) · 6 years ago

And delegating free downvotes is not included and won’t be for well.. who knows how long. So this means Traf and others have to actually do the work 🙂

$0.00

https://steemit.com/blog/@lucylin/still-not-smelling-any-coffee-yet-sgt-report-leaving-steemit-ffs-wake-up

lucylin (67) · 6 years ago (edited)

downvoting in action...

Sgt report has 10x more followers on you tube than there are active users on the whole of steemit....

edit: -my post go tdownvoted by BS etc....as if to prove my point. hilarious...

$0.05

abitcoinskeptic (73) · 6 years ago

Why not just give posting authority to flaggers so they can dole out your free downvotes? If one flagger eventually becomes powerful enough, say 2 million sp, even the biggest wankers won't be able to revenge.
There is a risk wankers will attack anyone delegating to the service or the service will go rogue, but it is what it is.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.05

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

Interesting idea, but could have been done with a HF.

$0.00

abitcoinskeptic (73) · 6 years ago

You are right and with freedown votes from a profit maximalists perspective you want to dish out as many downvotes as possible to narrow the reward pool while not receiving any yourself and gaining more upvotes.

It will atleast make this dance much more exciting don't you agree?
Start with the abusers, then go after people who annoy me, then the weak.

Personally, I think it would be better to experiment with a token first and not Steem in general, but what the hell do I know?

Posted using Partiko Android

bryan-imhoff (66) · 6 years ago

Agreed. The main thing I don’t like about the “free” downvote pool is how it frees up retaliatory flags in a way that benefits the abuser to a larger extent. Using haejin as an example... I can flag him for about 20 cents of damage. In retaliation he’ll come along and flag a few of my $3 to $5 posts down to zero. But what that’s actually done is weaponized all the upvotes on my current posts and turned them into de facto flags! So I win by depriving haejin of $10 worth of self votes. Under the new system, I flag for .20, get retaliated on for $10 and the only value haejin lost was .20 cents. Not $10.20...

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

Oh yeah, I had all three of his accounts flagging me at one point. :)

$0.00

zekepickleman (68) · 6 years ago

It really did awaken the passion and action. I love reading the strong opinions for and against (mostly against in the circles I follow) and those like me not trying to fight the tide, just find a fun different tactic to surf it.

It has also awoken the punk rock in a bunch of my favourite posters. ;)

Posted using Partiko iOS

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

Surfing the tide is really good place to be. I should try harder at shutting up. :) Nah...

zekepickleman (68) · 6 years ago

You change and I am flagging you post fork!

$0.03

chey (53) · 6 years ago

I sense a BATTLE ON THE HORIZON.

skramatters (66) · 6 years ago

$0.00

popcornexpress (58) · 6 years ago

$0.00

skramatters (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

Free flags are only an opportunity cost for the defenseless unprotected small accounts that will have no impact, and risk having any future growth stunted perhaps forever thus killing any ethically motivated flagging from the largest majority of active steemians.

All I know is that even though redfish and Minnow witness votes only account for a negligible percentage of total votes they tend to take notice when they lose their votes. Especially, from loud steemians, and definitely from the dolphins that make an impact. Sure, getting the freedom vote trumps all but basically what I'm saying is the only clear course to change is removing all votes for shit witnesses and demanding more professionalism and accountability from our BP. Nothing will change until we overhaul the decision makers..I also cannot express enough how having an anonymous entity like freedom in the shadows is destroying steem from a philosophical standpoint alone. It's a joke and mocks what decentralisation is all about, transparency.

Fear is the dominant currency on this platform. Kiss assery, apathy, and complacency are next.

baah (61) · 6 years ago

Decentralization is not all about transparency, and transparency isn't revealing one's identity. Decentralization is about decision making being done among a consensus of people as opposed to one person or position making the decisions, and transparency is the visibility of actions across the network, not about who is who because that does not change anything and it actually hinders and compromises more than anything, especially when the stakeholder is so heavily invested.

Accountability? Professionalism? What the fuck do you, whoever the fuck you may be, which by your own logic is hidden behind a pseudonym, think this is? Where did you gather any of such insipid requirements for a block producer? The only job a block producer has is to adjust the price feed, which should be completely scrapped, and their other less hands on duty is to make sure that their witnesses do not miss too many transactions, that is all. I heard other ridiculous things, like feduciary responsibility, or that they need a website and a mission statement, as if that has absolutely any bearing or is remotely tangent to basically RUNNING A SERVER. I will await your response, which I bet my entire 300 sp account on, would not turn up to ascertaine exactly why, and how, any stakeholder needs to compromise themselves by revealing their given name, or why and how a block producer must have such insipid requirements.

$0.00

skramatters (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

Well here the top block producers decide on the code that runs this place don’t they ? And since they are voted in it stands to reason that knowing what the people behind the servers stand for and what or whom they are motivated by should be transparent to all.

The rest of your points are your opinion and moot as they have no weight on the fact that this blockchain is an attempt at democratic consensus stake weighted voting. This isn’t a mere proof of work platform, it’s also heavily influenced by its social mechanisms.

You’re also confusing names with our ability to engage with and determine whom we want running the servers here. It’s not about a name or label it’s absolutely about having no ability to ascertain anything except voting habits from an investor that chooses not to reveal anything about their nature on a social media platform.

That doesn’t build any confidence and does nothing to help the ecosystem to reach a consensus for what is best for all stakeholders.

I’ll stop because I know you are very opinionated and I’m not looking to fight with you or create my own fork or interact with someone demonstrating such hostility.

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago (edited)

Well here the top block producers decide on the code that runs this place don’t they ? And since they are voted in it stands to reason that knowing what the people behind the servers stand for and what or whom they are motivated by should be transparent to all.

Not at all. Deciding on what code they want to run is entirely up to them. The fact that they are voted does not mean that they owe anyone anything, especially silly nonsense like "what motivated them" or "whom motivated them". Their job is almost entirely singular: makeing sure they don't miss blocks. Nowhere does it say that they owe anyone any kind of explanation or even to reveal their intentions.

You’re also confusing names with our ability to engage with and determine whom we want running the servers here. It’s not about a name or label it’s absolutely about having no ability to ascertain anything except voting habits from an investor that chooses not to reveal anything about their nature on a social media platform.

No I'm not confusing shit, you are the one that is apparently confused over this:

I also cannot express enough how having an %%%anonymous entity%%% like freedom in the shadows is destroying steem from a philosophical standpoint alone.

There is no philosophical standpoint to any of that. Which brings me to your statement that my point about decentralization NOT being about transparency, and Transparency NOT being about identity are debatable. They most certainly are not, do I have to open up a dictionary and walk you through what those things are defined as and explain to you why there's no such thing as "transparency is what decentralization is about" or the insinuating nonsense that transparency means engaging or otherwise participating in the social media aspect of the blockchain?

The point is that there is no need to "help the ecosystem to reach a consensus for what is best for all stakeholders", that's only your naivete which is best dismissed entirely by: trying to please everyone leads to displeasing everyone.

This, Steem, is many different things to different people and that is why there is nothing, like I wagered, that you could point to or reason that will make your case any less ridiculous, it doesn't mean that stakeholders have to participate in all it's aspects, or that the have any kind of obligation to explain themselves and their action to anyone. Nobody owes anyone here any such nonsense as 'so what motivated you to vote or act like this' and anyone who is naive enough to fall for such things, as if that would change anything, best re-examine everything they do in light of that insipid demand they have of others, lest they be a complete hypocrite.

$0.00

skramatters (66) · 6 years ago

Okay bud

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago

You owe me an explanation, what motivated you to respond with OK? Why is it OK? How is it OK? Or is it simply lip service? Mockery? Attempting to escape your own claims, leaving the conversation behind? Or you don't think your nonsense should be applied across the board, only to your arbitrary measure of how much stake in the system demands that you explain yourself? Even no answer is an answer so my satisfaction is guaranteed no matter what you decide to do.

$0.00

skramatters (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

I owe you nothing, just like your interpretations of the witnesses. Steem is different things to different people. There are no rules and no reason that I should waste any of my life on you. You're an island and your own circle jerk. I don't like your tone and I assure you I will never be bothered to have any correspondence with you again. I'm not impressed by your word salads and idgaf about your opinions. I didn't believe in muting until I ran into you, so congratulations on further diminishing your maniacal influence. I probably wont mute you because you're not worth another a tap of a touch screen. Ignoring your arrogance and ignorance will be easy. Owe you LMFAO 🤗

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago

In other words, you're a hypocrite: you demand others owe you their motivation but you don't owe anyone jack shit the same? You don't care about my 'opinion' but then you subscribe to it nonetheless.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago

#tonepolicing, mute me why don't, or tell me how little you think of me as if I do give a fuck, and that has anything to do with what I said.

#word-salad lol yeah sure.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

Yep, I mostly agree.

Integrity shows and so does lack of integrity. If you know what the right thing to do is, and you choose not to do it... because.. Money.

There isn't enough money in the world to change your integrity. But there might be enough to change your behavior. it's gross.

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago

I could bring back numerous instances of you saying "their stake their choice" or something to that effect, I could also bring back plenty of times you not only defended self voting abuse, but bid bots (just today) which is basically a matter of morality, since bidbots are cheating. Buying votes, you call it 'buying exposure' but it's simply buying votes, undermining the reason steem exists.

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

I disagree it is a moral issue to purchase something that someone else has listed for sale. There are dumb decisions and there is a lack of morality those are two different things.

Also self voting vs. deceitful fake accounts are two different things.

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago (edited)

You're completely wrong. You can assert to the contrary all you want but as others have pointed out, you most certainly are wrong, buying votes is not OK anywhere in the world. Buying exposure that comes through vote buying undermines the very reason that voting was implemented, to distribute the Rewards. Rewards bought are no longer rewards. Rewards can only be earned.

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

What if we didn't name them votes... What if we named them visibility points?

Look I am fine with disagreeing on somethings, at the end of the day...

if no one looks at the site and no one curates it's a problem. Label that problem however you want and we all might see a few points differently...

I don't want to focus on that, if people just Downvoted and Upvoted their own personal preferences that would help a lot even though we would still likely have some places where we disagree. Right now, barely any curation is happening.

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago

You can rename rewards to whatever you need to escape the ethical dilemma of cheating at the game, it will not change the fact that you are condoning cheating.

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago (edited)

It doesn't matter at all what they're called, it matters what the act of buying and selling them does to the entire ecosystem, from the very premise of why they exist in the first place all the way to who that act attracts and the effects those actors will have in turn. I think I know why you didn't want to explain the reason for your disapproval of certain content not deserving the votes they bought, it's because you don't even want to broach the issue of what is good or bad, but the reason why I asked that was to point out that Vote Buying itself, that proposal, it appeals to a certain kind of person and many will try to deny it, but it a obvious enough, the same kind of people buy sex, they try to entice others with marketing and hype, they are focused primarily on appearance and such superficial things, but at the end of the day, after they came on some strangers tits, after they sold someone the fluff, after they finished spinning their wheels about "exposure" and such vapid things, they undoubtedly know the bitter unsatisfactory taste that it leaves, the net negative, or they are psychopaths and they enjoy using others, they derived satisfaction from such debasement.

$0.00

schattenjaeger (71) · 6 years ago

I disagree it is a moral issue to purchase something that someone else has listed for sale.

To be fair, I can offer you a slave for sale. Or an assassination service. People can offer all sorts of immoral things for sale.

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

Again, a bad decision and immoral are two very different things.

You make a point, but really are you going to make that comparison?

$0.00

schattenjaeger (71) · 6 years ago (edited)

A lot of people vote with their wallets based on moral decisions. Such as vegans not going to McDonald's - even for a veggie burger. Or people not spending money on clothing if they disagree with the company's child labour policies. And such.

So morality and purchasing decisions do indeed go hand in hand.

Also, who are honosurf and coininstant? And why are people on this chain such children?

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago (edited)

Good point.

Just an unhappy guy with two accounts and he is mad so he is taking it out on everyone else.

$0.00

skramatters (66) · 6 years ago

$0.00

baah (61) · 6 years ago

Fork it, it's open source, and expose exactly who you are, as you want others to do, or shut the fuck up with this nonsense ya hypocrite.

steevc (73) · 6 years ago

I need to read up on how this is expected to work. I've done plenty of downvotes, but Steemflagrewards has paid me back. They just don't have enough power to take on Mr H who has continued taking Steem whilst nobody else supports him. He even has his own trending tag! The whales could deal with abusers if they cared, but it seems profit is all that matters. I do fear for the future of Steem...

michealb (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

Me thinks once it happens he will change his tactic. This is based on thinking he is a business man and will weigh up all the possibilities of him winning long term by continuing to do what he is doing.

Be more like, thanks for all the steem guys. I have now decided to .............. - you dumb fks lol

$0.03

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

That would be a very interesting plot twist.

$0.00

bluerobo (61) · 6 years ago (edited)

Yup! That.

It's not that downvoting gets abused now by carpet bombing everything out of butthurt.

Gonna be sipping my juice while the place burns down.

$0.03

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

It will be okay...

$0.00

bluerobo (61) · 6 years ago

I will be, you will be. It.... meh ;)

Posted using Partiko Android

khaleelkazi (75) · 6 years ago

Hopefully enough passion and interest was sparked in the big whales who will band together against those big-time abusers and wage war. May be ugly for a little while but could curve the behavior. Hard to say where it’ll go. Unless big fish step in to do the flagging, it won’t get any better.

skramatters (66) · 6 years ago

$0.00

stackin (78) · 6 years ago

There are lots of big holders on steem that hates my guts for no reason... I really don't know why HAHA.... I'm going to get destroyed after HF21!

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

Buy DRAMA and PalNet!

skramatters (66) · 6 years ago

$0.00

reazuliqbal (67) · 6 years ago

Good point!

What if the whales realizes there is no point in downvoting each other because that won't help none of them? Similar size flag and retaliation would take same amount from both the flaggers. If they cannot flag now because they would be losing rewards, won't they lose then?

Many are taking about flagging bid-botted posts, what if the bid bots retalite to protect their loyal customers? One could argue they would lose delegations, IMO 50/50 would sweeten the deal for both delegators and bot owners.

Sorry for the cynicism! :)

por500bolos (68) · 5 years ago

Sorry for the cynicism! :)

Sheez @reazuliqbal. I always wonder why someone would need to apologize for showing some cynicism on public forums sometimes.

Didn't you know yet the following? };)

“Cynic, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are not as they ought to be.”

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

If they thought the level of content added value to the steem they hold, wouldn't they already be curating? I mean it would be insane to hold a lot of Steem, dislike the content we have and not curate right? That would be crazy.

$0.00

freebornangel (73) · 5 years ago

Maybe traf will start protecting his stake,...
Rofl,...

Don't they claim to be self voting to prevent dilution by 'bad' actors?

I think they keep the daily rshares high because it pushes more off the bottom of the food chain.
If those big accounts stopped flagging and self voting this would be a much more pleasant pool to swim in, imo.

Hell, for all I know it may be all a put on.
There is evidence to support that view.
I mean, you get enough comments to know that only a few scores of us are known to not be sockpuppets.

bitcoinflood (77) · 6 years ago

Real talk though they still have the power do they not? Even if 1,000 people downvotes his post if they don't equal to how much steem they have staked it wont matter and in theory they could downvote your stuff in a heartbeat with a 1% vote in most cases and STILL get rewarded for doing so lol. Or am I still not understanding this right ?

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

They could downvote now if they wanted to.

Everyone can downvote him after the fork too, he will still go revenge on everyone. It's just how it is.

bitcoinflood (77) · 6 years ago

yeah but, now he can downvote people with lesser power easier and get rewarded for doing so because of the downvote pool. Idk, maybe I am missing something but it seriously makes no sense to me yet lol

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

yeah, it all equals out the same. Your stake vs. his stake. He get his stake again free and so do you, so the ration of killing you is about the same. :)

coininstant (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

$0.00

steemmatt (69) · 6 years ago (edited)

That meme is priceless. These whales may seem like they're scary juggernauts (kind or not), but truth be told is that they really don't have that much money in this place as compared to real whales in the world/Bitcoin. Everything is relative to our current community. They could be squashed with ease if bigger money flows into this place, but I'm not holding my breath.

$0.00

bearbear613 (67) · 5 years ago

just buy beer. It is the cause and solution to all of the worlds problems - HOMER (not that famous philosopher)

$0.00

steem-plus (73) · 6 years ago

Hi, @whatsup!

You just got a 0.28% upvote from SteemPlus!
To get higher upvotes, earn more SteemPlus Points (SPP). On your Steemit wallet, check your SPP balance and click on "How to earn SPP?" to find out all the ways to earn.
If you're not using SteemPlus yet, please check our last posts in here to see the many ways in which SteemPlus can improve your Steem experience on Steemit and Busy.

$0.00

truthforce (66) · 6 years ago

No one will do any diff. Anyone who has enough SP can do what they want, bully who they want, harass who they want, etc. Giving them more power just gives them more power. No one magically becomes a better human with more power from what history shows.... quite the opposite

$0.00

marcusantoniu26 (62) · 6 years ago

$0.00

coininstant (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

$0.00