Regarding the situation with Haejin

jacobts (65) · 7 years ago

I dont know what to think. Just that it would be nice if we let the whales do whale things and then focussed on helping each other. I dont know.

$1.41

4 votes

remlaps (74) · 7 years ago (edited)

First, I don't think it's an urgent problem. If it's bad for the platform, then @haejin's voters will be punished with falling Steem prices, and the steem that (s)he dumps on the market will find its way into the hands of people who will use it better, and bring the price of Steem back up. In the end, market-based Steem prices mean that the harm is self-regulating.

However, here are some thoughts:

It might help to shift back to 50/50 author/curator reward ratio, or better - let authors set their author/curator split so it could become more lucrative for patrons like @ranchorelaxo to find higher quality posts to vote for. IMO, we need a much higher ratio of [readers & voters] / authors for this site to really thrive. The best way I can see to do that is by moving rewards from authors to curators, and if it helps the platform, that change would help authors too.
People with enough stake to matter should go ahead and downvote if they think it's called for.
I've also been wondering about a way that minnows could use something like quorum sensing to guarantee safety in numbers when flagging bigger fish. Quorum sensing is a signalling method that bacteria use in order to take collective action only when there are enough in the environment to accomplish their goal. It's described here, along with some examples:

Two possibilities that come to mind are: (a) a web site where minnows register their "intent to downvote", and then the web-site submits a mass downvote transaction if and only if enough minnows register their intent; or (b) an SMT that accomplishes the same thing in a decentralized fashion, and simultaneously rewards minnows for early registration of intent to flag posts that eventually get flags triggered.

$1.19

6 votes

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

I don't feel any huge sense of urgency about it either. I love that you brought up price adjustment as a solution. I like that solution about as well as any other.

$0.14

remlaps (74) · 7 years ago (edited)

I should have mentioned, the quorum sensing idea pertains to this excerpt from your post:

What I do wish we would work on is a community based way to gather consensus and work through issues in the community. We have posts and votes, surely there is a way to tag community issues for comment and action discussion.

Another example from nature that we could seek to emulate would be the travel of schools of fish or flocks of birds.

(Source: http://www.isciencetimes.com/articles/6725/20140123/murmuration-starlings-dance-sky-perfect-unison.htm)

Although I have less of an idea for how that might work. Apparently, the birds simply follow a couple simple rules by following the bird in front of them and maintaining a minimum distance from their neighbors. I guess Steemizens would need to self-organize into flagging alliances (which is sort-of what's already happening) in order to make use of these methods.

Thinking out loud, how 'bout a "flag of the day" post or hash-tag. An alliance of minnow steeemizens enters into a mutual defense agreement and maybe takes turns posting a daily post where everyone can comment with the posts they think should be flagged, and the link in the top-voted comment gets downvoted by everyone on the "team" at an agreed time. As a result of the mutual defense agreement, everyone also upvotes to counter any retaliatory flags that are received.

I think quorum sensing is more promising than "schooling", however, since it doesn't involve any long term trust or commitment.

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

Interesting idea about the flag of the day post and trying to gather some consensus in that manner. I like it especially if it could be done without a huge amount of drama and emotion.

$0.11

svkrulze (52) · 7 years ago

This an opportunity for us to understand our weaknesses if and when we were to get large investors, it has provided a window into how easily the site could be taken over by anyone with enough money to buy in.

This really is the central problem to this whole issue. The way Steemit is setup gives too much power into the hand of someone who holds enough steempower to not only allocate a huge share of the reward pool to a party of his choice but also take away considerable reward by means of flagging from anyone who dares to say a thing.

This is the same problem which has plagued human society for ages. Money ultimately wins.

I really do not know what a solution could be but one thought that comes to mind is to change how flagging works and make it more democratic in the sense that no individual can impact rewards through flagging by such amounts no matter the SP if enough number of others don't flag the post as well.

This may not be a great solution as it may result in flagging contests among groups but at least this will take away such huge powers from individuals.

$0.84

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

I think it is kind of beautiful that each person is able to allocate their own stake and nothing less, nothing more. I hear your point though.

$0.00

svkrulze (52) · 7 years ago

I only mean that individuals should not be able to destroy someone else's hard work, that's all

$0.66

adonisabril (74) · 7 years ago

He's clearly not the only one doing this thing. His, is just more obvious with one account constantly voting him. There's more with elaborate ploys involving several accounts. **You misspelled ranchorelaxo.

$0.82

4 votes

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

Agreed, he is not alone. Thank you for much for the letting me fix the links to https://steemit.com/@ranchorelaxo

$0.00

darth-azrael (67) · 7 years ago

So if everybody who disagreed with the rewards levels of his posts flagged them, would that not go a long way towards resolving the problem? Disagreement with rewards is the number one reason listed to flag after all.

$0.72

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

Bingo, but he is revenge flagging. That would become more difficult it there were a community effort.

$0.00

zelenicic (49) · 7 years ago

Too many people should be involved to make a significant punishment. Keeping in mind that only those who have enough power can make a difference. My downvote is almost meaningless

darth-azrael (67) · 7 years ago

Yeah, I guess it takes a critical mass of people with enough steem power to matter...

$0.00

vieira (63) · 7 years ago

According to http://steem.supply/@haejin, Haejin will earn more than $ 26,000 this week, it's a pretty high amount, but I really do not know what can be done in a situation like this. To solve the problem, changes should be made to the platform.

$0.69

remlaps (74) · 7 years ago

Meanwhile, @ranchorelaxo has lost something like $4 million in a month due to Steem's fall from its January high, and (s)he is that much more vulnerable to competition from other high stakes investors who will make better use of their votes. It would take about 3 years at $26,000 per week to make up that $4 million in lost value.

$0.67

4 votes

vieira (63) · 7 years ago

I do not think he bought all his Steem when the price was at its maximum, in addition, it is likely that the Steem will rise again. This is a win-win. But I only say. I really do not have an opinion about it.

$0.66

remlaps (74) · 7 years ago

You're right, I checked the account history at steemwhales earlier, and the account has been highly staked well back into 2017. But it still does a service for the platform by leaving the Steem powered up instead of cashing out, and that service did cost $4 million or more over the last month.

My point is this: If the price will go up regardless of what @haejin does, then I guess it's not really much of a problem for the rest of us. If @haejin's activity is so harmful that it is driving the price down, then @ranchorelaxo will pay a major price, and the market will put an end to it.

$0.08

vieira (63) · 7 years ago

I guess so, I really do not have an opinion formed about it, I am one of those who believes that everyone should act with all the freedom that is offered to them. So I think, if that kind of strategy represents a threat to Steemit, the Steemit team should take action, otherwise, I really do not see what we can do about it. I simply try to create content to earn more money each time, and grow little by little here in Steemit, in fact, I worry very little about the things that others do. In a way, we all win when people buy Steem with the goal of increasing their SP, regardless of how they use it.

$0.66

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

I think the changes need to come from the culture and the community.

$0.02

sarah249 (50) · 7 years ago

the community need to vote the right witness who can uphold good policies.

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

I keep asking myself if the witnesses should be a part of this solution or not. A case could be made for either way, imo.

$0.00

vieira (63) · 7 years ago

Yes, but I don't know if that is going to happen, I do not have so much faith in people.

max1994 (1) · 7 years ago

He's obviously not by any means the only one doing this thing. His, is simply more clear with one record continually voting him. There's additional with expand ploys including a few records

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

Agreed, he is not alone.

$0.00

nuridin (50) · 7 years ago

I just have one question, whether people like the content of what Haejin is posting everyday, what's the point of flagging him? I'm not with or against him as I don't know him well and the posts I see he's doing are purely technical trading content. I've never seen any of his posts driving hate speech or demising anybody on steemit. So, I just wonder, why are there people so mad at him to the extent that they flag him or call for group flag for his posts... This is a question I have, not a defending comment on his behalf.

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

The flag should have been named a down vote, the question at hand for me has nothing to do with his content. (for me)

It has to do with one big investor being able to allocate (with a vote) so much of the reward pool to one person 10 times a day. Is that good for the platform. I have mixed feelings about the whole situation.

$0.00

onealfa (74) · 7 years ago

I have not even smalest doubt that both these accounts haej.... and rancho...... belongs to the same one person. It is almost proovable logicaly if you take time to dig into steem blockchain and database. So i see the problem quite simple , at least to my eyes - almost 90% of those huge weekly rewards are withdrawn from the pool by SELFVOTING. And clearly les than 7-9% of it comes from his 22K folowers. Are you really happy about this?

$7.49

lifenbeauty (60) · 7 years ago

I actually believe that Ned should interfere (and I've noticed him downvoting Haejin).

I disagree with using the whole community acting together to solve this because of two reasons:

It's nearly impossible to organize a huge number of small participants without a leader, especially when organizing them in doing something that they are afraid to do (flag a powerful account).
Even if it was partially possible for this case, as you pointed out, someone with a huge amount of money could come in and abuse the system in the same way as Haejin&Rancho, making it impossible for the community to do anything notable about it. Thus, we need some sort of non-community mechanism to prevent such cases anyway.

dexter-k (67) · 7 years ago

We used to have a 4 post per day rule. Anything after 4 posts in a day would have a declining limit in the payout amount. I believe that simply implementing this rule again would basically solve this problem. I suppose haejin could make multiple accounts to circumvent this, but it would be much more noticeable and I think he would be much more easily called out for abuse if he did this.

$0.56

lifenbeauty (60) · 7 years ago

That rule sounds great to me and I don't see any downsides to it.

I think that it's nearly impossible to make more than 4 meaningful posts per day, even if you are a full-time Steemian. It's possible only in some categories, such as memes, but still it's a feed spam.

Thanks for letting me know that it existed.

$0.00

onealfa (74) · 7 years ago

I agree with you 100%

$6.96

lifenbeauty (60) · 7 years ago

Thank you. : )

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

The 4 post a day rule would have helped in this case. I have a hard time picturing who else would be impacted. I am thinking that would be a good thing to bring back

$0.00

dexter-k (67) · 7 years ago

I’ve been trying to promote it for a while now, I think it was a great system, but I think the reason it was removed was because of the voting rules that came along with HF19. It would also be quite easy for haejin to circumvent by just adding a new account, but if he did that we could flag it to oblivion before it gained a high rep. His abuse would also be much more obvious if he started posting with a second account. I think it’s a good solution that only impacts reward pool rapers.

$0.00

sumonsha (59) · 7 years ago

I have seen many people who do not get evaluated due to a lot of good post. We all should evaluate the good posts, so that everyone will benefit.

fishmon (57) · 7 years ago

Haven't they made peace already? I remember I've seen a post where they reached a deal. Haejin will power up with 100% 6/10 posts and everybody should be happy! What happened with that?

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

It fell apart.

$0.00

sarah249 (50) · 7 years ago

Put a cap on daily posts. limit it to a max of 5 posts per day.
add requirement for diversity of votes, if 80% of my votes goto one person my vote weight should be reduced by half. this way people will be forced to vote different people
upvote weight should also be related to a minimum number of words. a post with 5 words should not get same earning as a post with 500 words. the extra effort should count for something.
Not related to this situation but also needs to be considered is the use of voting bots. there should be a cap on the max amount someone can bid. it should be capped at 10 SBD to allow minnows a fair chance

above changes should increase earning for minnows in my opinion. There will be workarounds for these too eventually.

dexter-k (67) · 7 years ago

There used to be a 4 post daily limit, I'm in favor of that coming back as I see it as a good way of fixing this type of problem. Each post after four used to have a decreasing limit of possible payout. I feel that is a rational way of fixing this. Most people don't or can't even post more than 4 times a day, so the only ones who would be affected by that change would be the ones who are abusing the current unlimited post per day rule.

The requirement for diversity of votes will never fly. If you start telling people who they can and cant vote for with the money they have earned or invested, they will take their money elsewhere. I know I would. Plus it goes against one of the core principals of this place. No one is forced to vote, for anyone or anything, and no one is restricted from voting, for anyone or anything.

Words don't always make a post, there are a ton of photographers on this platform (me included) who like to make simple posts of images. Words have a tendency to distract from the photos and some photographers believe that a photo should stand on its own merit without needing description. Plus, there is a ton of effort that goes into making a photo that many don't see or realize, just because there are few words doesn't mean it is a low value post.

About a year ago there was a very big discussion of bots, back then there were no voting bots and the bots in use were "manipulating" the system by voting strategically for curation rewards. Bid bots and vote bots are a luxury that the development on Steemit has given to us. Keep in mind that these bots are created and controlled not by Steemit but by their creators. Steemit has no ability, and indeed no right, to tell bot users how much others can pay for bids, unless Steemit inc were to introduce new rules about bots, placing a limit on the amount someone can bid isn't possible. And again, you start to get into telling people how they can and cannot spend their hard earned SBD, I doubt that's gonna go over very well for most.

sarah249 (50) · 7 years ago (edited)

@dexter-k I agree with you on most points, i just need to mention that yes the bots are controlled by their creators but i have seen enforcements. Grumpy Cat has been flagging bots that accept bids on older content and it has forced the bot owners to change their bots.

i do understand your point that steemit cannot tell others what they can and what they cannot do but it hurts minnows more than dolphins and whales. If Steemit is to grow exponentially then they need to make sure that the new users are getting good rewards. I dont see how a new user joins the system and starts earning decent money with just quality content. maybe my suggestions are not good but they need to come up with something to keep the buzz going.

$0.47

dexter-k (67) · 7 years ago

Yes I agree it is a problem. The thing is, it has always been hard for minnows here, it was hard for me as a minnow too. But if you treat this place the way it was meant to be, by engaging with the community, making good posts and meaningful comments you will grow. I don’t think your suggestions are not good, in fact what is great about them is that you are taking the time to make suggestions. If you keep up that engagement and be real, you will continue to grow here :)

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

Interesting thoughts. I'm not a huge fan, but I get the reasons they would be suggested and I welcome the input on the topic.

fyi - we used to have a 4 post penalty. Everything after 4 earned less. I don't remember why they removed it.

$0.00

albertvhons (64) · 7 years ago

i do believe ranchorelaxo and haejin is the same person.

There were lots of debate going around on that issue, lots of witness would not interfere because they are investor. thats A whale account invest in steemit. you can't blame haejin just like that, blame the game!

WE have flag system, but flagging all the time will hurt your account so much, SO for mr. it does not work.

System will always unfair towards other. If we think haejin is abusing, we flag him. Ned doesn't interfere for he was the one said, let the community decide!

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

We need the big stake holders to police the other big stake holders.

$0.09

albertvhons (64) · 7 years ago

we do have big stakeholders, And they are the steemit witness!

Do they care about that?

I guess they didn't. The very reason why they don't Intervene because they are investors. The steemit witness are looking for investors.

If they are really going to change that, They can make it tru HF20 where all accounts should post only 4 times a day if this was good enough.

SEE, it is in the rule of the game. To solve that issue, WE must change the game.

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

Some of the witnesses are large stake holders and some aren't. I guess it would be those with the largest stake that would have to "police" those with the largest stake.

$0.07

theguruasia (67) · 7 years ago

@whatsup,
He is draining the daily reward pool. Everyday we got a fixed amount of STEEM into the pool. It's around 48,000 STEEM per day! So he is draining this pool with his dirty partner!
But by saying this, I didn't mean the other party who started flag war against Haejin is doing the right thing! They also rape the pool. Therefore, let them fight and it we can drain Haejin by making a community whale I think that would be the best thing! I don't mean Haejin should not earn anything from the reward pool. Daily 300 SBD is okay for him. But this is huge! So, if community start something against both parties I will do my best as a Dolphin!

Cheers~

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

While I don't like the distribution of the reward pool. The tools we have to change it is our votes.

$0.00

theguruasia (67) · 7 years ago

@whatsup,
I think in upcoming HF20 will make a slight change! Hope it will work!

Cheers~

artzanolino (64) · 7 years ago

It's one of the issues I see on this platform, it's too easy to dominate with capital investment... Like most things though. I guess if we individually decide to keep upvoting, supporting and creating networks of quality accounts, we can atleast make sure some of the good stuff trends. But yeah, it's up to us. It would be good if active accounts could petition against users they deem abusive without the reprecussions of the downvote.

thesimpson (59) · 7 years ago

This has been going on for a while and nothing can be done, its an inherent flaw in humanity. Greed.
You want a solution, accept your own greed and treat others how you wish to be treated. Haejin is a force. He spouts out shitty technical posts by the multitude and he also has lots of dumb fucks following it and worshipping it. To me it's no different to watching people walk through the doors of McDonalds and feed money into that corporate poison.

$0.20

shivohum2015 (65) · 7 years ago

Somedays back I though to publish an article "a centralized steemit within a decentralized platform" without citing the name but one of my friend suggest me to not to publish this at this moment and even if I dont mention name there would be much more chance to be a targetted one by publishsing this kind of article.

And to be honest I dont want to say anything on this also. I am very little minnow, Just imagine I used to earn hardly 100 SBD or so in a month and that is how I manage livelihood and I dont want to put this at risk.

If someone having 2 or 3 Million SP can intervene in this matter. But let me tell you that whatever is going on now is taking steemit in to a centralized factory within a decentralized concept.

Thank you and Have a great day.

$0.17

adnanrabbani (70) · 7 years ago

huh that's huge amount from one week and it certainly falls in rewardpoolrape, i think it's time to set max rewards per post and comment the maximum reward per post should be limited to 15$ and max reward per comment should be limited to 5$ and i think if that algorithm implemented then such problems solved automatically.

$0.13

askmee (59) · 7 years ago

He just flag me because I comment on post of @berniesanderse

$0.10

atmosblack (63) · 7 years ago

Should Ned fix it? Are we talking about the same Ned, who is upvoting his comment under Dans post for 3k$ after downvoting him on a 0 payout post? This Ned, who should do marketing for STEEM and keep us up to date on the advancements? The same Ned, who is obviously raping the reward pool more than someone like haejin can ever do? Should he fix this?
No, I guess, he should do hundreds of other things, that make him look like a real CEO - the first thing being professional in his business behaviour.
After this is done, we could talk about other people....

$0.06

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

While I agree Ned could make many improvements and I thought the whole aggrandizement thing was nothing less than funny. He did remove the vote, and although it was in poor form, the over all incident was kind of aggrandized it's self.

I don't hate ned, but I agree he should talk about his vision more for a couple of reasons. It helps create a vision. I think many misunderstand the direction he is trying to head. If he is communicating it will help him refine it. He needs to work on having thicker skin.

Ned actually used to communicate with the community much more. When sneak came on board there was a clamp down on SteemIt, Inc's communication. Ned is responsible though, and has left himself open to all of the criticism you mention.

What would you do about Haejin if you were ned?

$0.05

atmosblack (63) · 7 years ago

If I were Ned, I would lead by example. That´s it.
I don´t upvote Haejin myself very often, but he is at least trying to provide value (which of course is relative by nature). This Sanders guy who is fighting him on the other hand, is only writing hate posts without any value and therefore raping the reward pool way more in my opinion. Well, I don´t want to take sides and my strategy would be to starve them of attention (and therefore upvotes) - but I´m not influential enough to make my voice heard. Thanks for discussing this topic like an adult! That means a lot to me!

$0.00

skiesandsports (60) · 7 years ago

It's such a tough one, but I wonder if there could be something done to the flagging system, whereby a flag only takes away from the payout when it has been backed up by a certain amount of other users. So one flag, even from a powerful user, wouldn't be worth as much, but multiple users flagging would be like a verification process. I suppose with a hoard of accounts one could still revenge flag, but not to anywhere near as many accounts.

$0.02

gsari (47) · 7 years ago

I strongly believe the abuse will end in due time. I authored a post discussing reasons for this https://steemit.com/steemit/@gsari/the-reward-pool-abuse-saga

$0.00

elmarnis (58) · 7 years ago

In the theory of teamwork has a great role for those who want success in all areas, and try to bring new investors to the platform in order to contribute to the development of the platform, and the most important thing to share useful topics .

$0.00

markzuckerbergs (56) · 7 years ago (edited)

Agree with you we should not involve ned or steemit inc in this matter. We should be unite otherwise someone invest 10 million in steem and become the king of community.Few days before dan downvoted all haejin's post but i think that this is community's problem and together we can solve this.

$0.00

durgaani (55) · 7 years ago

@whatsup...so many peoples got lose their rewards because of this guy..my one of the Friend @biasnarrative.. he is tottaly lose because of his ..every time and in every post he flagged with a high power ..and tottal rewards get losed ..i felt so sad because of this guy..@whatsup bro you are also one of my friend ..my suggestion dont put a post agains him ..if he saw you also effected by him..this a bad thing in steemit

$0.00

sizuka (53) · 7 years ago

this is great investing sir and thanks for sharing this, this is something new to me.

$0.00

appreciator (66) · 7 years ago

This post has received gratitude of 2.46 % from @appreciator thanks to: @whatsup.

$0.00

yaanivapeji (65) · 7 years ago

Maybe if those that are using their stake to flagged haejin, all the time, used it to bring a lot of minnows up, the large minnows would have been strong enough to come together for the community.

$0.00

steemclaira (50) · 7 years ago

thanks for bringing such a topic into discussion sir..this is a major problem now we all have to face today..i dont think that he is alone here.. :/

$0.00

beanz (68) · 7 years ago

How many other authors have been picked up by a particular whale and put on their autovote? @haejin is no saint but he's a product of bernie and the mob that followed him into battle. You wanna pick a side fine, ach athnaíonn ciaróg ciaróg eile.

$0.00

resteemia (56) · 7 years ago

to haejin boss :) nice post @whatsup

@resteemia

$0.00

realsteemian (52) · 7 years ago

Excellent analysis of the present situation. Followed you and upvoted.

$0.00

jhonprince (51) · 7 years ago

of your information, there are already many who do such things, but everyone has their own way, it is true it will cost some parties.

$0.00

robinsoncaiso (44) · 7 years ago

very good to know that sir keeep it up :)

@upvoted

$0.00

booster (68) · 7 years ago

This post has received a 5.07 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @whatsup.

$0.00

nishaopt (48) · 7 years ago

Now only I got to know certain facts!! This is a serious problem we have here.But yet I m clueless that what we can do for that since we have no power like that
-cheers-

$0.00

azizurrahman (40) · 7 years ago

Hey @whatsup this post has been upvoted to me @azizurrahman and also get a comment

$0.00

diya28 (53) · 7 years ago

thank you for making clear post about it, I several read about @haejin , I think we should avoid rustic language and rude behavior here, the atmosphere of @steemit should be peaceful and equal for all

$0.00

rahulislam (47) · 7 years ago

He's plainly not by any means the only one doing this thing. His, is simply more evident with one record always voting him

$0.00

rahulislam (47) · 7 years ago

I also figure in the event that we independently choose to continue upvoting, supporting and making systems of value accounts, we can atleast ensure a portion of the well done patterns. In any case, better believe it, it's dependent upon us. Active should records could request of against clients they esteem injurious without the reprecussions of the downvote.

$0.00

adson (60) · 7 years ago

@haejin could anyone special for @ranchorelaxo so she always gets a vote,
I think it is reasonable, if we want to like @haejin, we must build a strong friendship in steemit ...

$0.00

borislavzlatanov (54) · 7 years ago

A solution that makes sense to me is to create a community that addresses this type of situation. The community would have to have a clear definition of what it considers an abuse. If people agree with that definition, they will support the community and it will develop a strong downvoting trail. The more trust the community builds, the stronger its trail will get. If the community starts doing behavior that people consider inappropriate, they will pull out and the voting trail will get weaker.

I see this as a mechanism to channel many people's efforts into a single direction that's useful. Otherwise decentralization would mean everybody doing whatever random thing they do with their available resources, resulting in no benefit to this platform or society as a whole.

$0.00

ariastark02 (44) · 7 years ago

Nice post beautiful presented and explained. detail oriented with nice rewards. thank you for sharing

$0.00

kabbo62 (19) · 7 years ago

Yuppppp I follow you... upvote and resteem. ... And thanks for sharing post...

$0.00

abdurrahim007 (42) · 7 years ago

I am impress sir cuz your outstanding post sir

@upvoted

$0.00