They need to have clear guidelines and enforce them platform wide if they are going to continue with this, otherwise it is just bullying.
RE: To all downvoters: @jrcornel is now on board with newsteem
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
To all downvoters: @jrcornel is now on board with newsteem
Exactly! I turned off my bot entirely....sill get lots of downvotes. Pushed my voting CSI over 20%...still get downvotes. It is bullying and there is no ther way to put it. And they expect me to just take it and not retaliate........wrong.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The platform is not theirs. We don't want their guidelines. It's pure bullying.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
He posted an off-topic post in my STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) tribe (aka community) and I hit it with a 0 SP flag to hide it from the tribe.
He then started downvoting all the posts and freaked out and spam my posts with comments like this:
But yeah, I'm just bullying him.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Perhaps you should flag him for using a "stem-math/science/technology" tag. He might have gone too far with the whole "seriously, get cancer" stuff and wanting to know your home address. That stuff is not cool. But its also not cool to flag someone for using the "math" tag, which is a general tag and not a STEM tribe specific tag.
I'd love for this comment to be received in the spirit it is meant, I'm just saying that your tribe has no right to assume ownership over the tags "math", "science", "technology". "engineering" but if it was "stem-math" I'd understand the flag I suppose. Also, keeping it to a STEM token flag rather than an SP flag is also a fair way to do stuff.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
No one owns the tags and the flag only used my own token voting power and has 0 effective steem power. So no rewards outside of my tribe token were removed. And it didn’t even have much rewards it is just don’t preventative.
A tribe focused on Stem with posts about anything and everything is a useless tribe.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Okay, that is perfectly fair. I completely agree you have every right to do that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The platform is not
Theirs. We don't want their guidelines.
It's pure bullying.
- oldtimer
I'm a bot. I detect haiku.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Agreed, but at least if they were to publish some universal standards, users would have an idea of how to avoid having their posts zeroed out by breaking one of their rules.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well Steemcleaners already kind of have their own guide rules in place that they go by and make available to people. But it still doesn't work out because, 1. people don't bother trying to know how to stroke steemcleaners' ego, 2. steemcleaners only goes after those they can pick on without fear of serious retribution, 3. they also are corrupt and play favorites, for example, ignoring everything burnpost does...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Removing downvoting would be terrible, human. It serves a good purpose.
There does indeed need to be some decency as to how one downvoted a post however.
For example, Tub Cat’s downvotes tend to land on blatant spam.
Posted using Partiko iOS
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Get out of the tub so that you can realize that downvotes do not work, cat. People now want to remove the STEEM reward pool all together and just have POB for SMTs because of the fact that downvotes can be weaponized.
A lot of whales or massively delegated accounts are aggressively trying to control what people can and cannot do on Steem. These guys are kind of worse that Youtube staff, not quite as bad as Twitter, those folks are still the most fucked up of them all, but Steem's up there now...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Steemit has become worse than YouTube or Twitter because of these large delegated accounts. They have nominated themselves czars, in the long run they will be exposed for the frauds they all are.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Moderators with downvotes and a universal standard gets my vote. Leaving flags in the hands of the community is a recipe for a toxic environment.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm not a fan of the moderator idea, because its still centralizing control.
In my view, the non-linear rewards curve was a good move for combating spam self-voting without causing aggressive changes. In fact, I'd trade making the threshold even higher for removing the new downvote mana bar.
I believe people need to choose between upvoting and downvoting. If taking a financial loss is worth it to the person to reduce the other guy's rewards, okay then, they just reduced their own network share for that decision.
Frankly, I can understand why people feel there is a need to have the flagging system. But it is an emotionally charged action that hurts the network by making Steem a hostile environment. I'd make downvotes cost triple an upvote on a shared mana bar so that it would be a costly decision made only out of necessity.
If people had to give up 3 upvotes to downvote 1 thing, they might think carefully about just how much they disliked it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I like the ideas, but I think having it cost the same as an upvote was sufficient. Having more downvotes than upvotes is beyond silly to me. Most social sites are trying to get rid of negativity, we are fostering it. My vote would be to change the curator/author split to 75/25 (in favor of curator), lower the linear thresh-hold slightly (so that we don't discourage voting small users), and make downvotes cost the same as an upvote (if not more like you suggested).
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I definitely agree with 75% to curators and 25% to authors. It allows for professional curators to theoretically earn enough to make a job out of it and if we had many career curators we might stop seeing so many bot systems and the authors would ultimately earn more.
A clear problem we are seeing is that people do not want to spend the time curating. Even the downvoting crowd goes off about how important Proof of Brain is and then thoughtlessly uses a downvote automation tool...
If we're going to do a "skin in the game" stake-weighted voting system let's do it right and make the risk/reward worth the investment.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yep, agreed completely. Plus changing the curator/author split would likely make "policing" users less necessary. When someone is forced to give up half their vote value to a stranger, they tend to try and game it somehow to keep more for themselves. If that split was say 75/25 or even 80/20 I would think they would be more likely to vote a little more altruistically, though that is just an assumption on my part.
Agreed, what we have right now isn't it, hopefully we can get some changes without having to wait another year or two.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit