RE: Plutocracy - Rule by the Wealthy - The State of Steemit

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Plutocracy - Rule by the Wealthy - The State of Steemit

in politics •  7 years ago  (edited)

You are fresh to Steem so I am going to assume you don't have a handle on the post/comment reward system yet. It's ok, it took me a long time.

All values shown on posts and comments are subject to change due to votes (not just on the post/comment, but on all others as well), the market price of STEEM, and other factors. They are pending, and have a 7 day period from the time they were created where Steem SP stakeholders are free to influence them up or down depending on their stake amount and vote weight.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Good explanation. I don't think it is responsive to @lukigrl's underlying assumption, which is that upvotes are themselves earned.

Could you enlighten me as to why, in a market metaphor system, like curation is, there should be a downvote? It makes no sense to me, and I clearly am not alone. @lukigrl seems to be saying that it isn't fair, and to be reacting strongly to that lack of fairness by considering not participating.

This is demonstrably a widespread apprehension regarding downvotes, and seems to me to be a clear and present danger to Steemit - even absent significant competition. In a market for platforms as I expect to soon develop, that danger is existential.

What is the compelling purpose of downvotes that might make it necessary despite the fact it is an existential threat to Steemit itself? I haven't heard even ANY rationale for downvotes in a market metaphor system, much less a compelling one.

It's not a market metaphor system, it's a game metaphor system

You're approaching FUD here. "Existential threat"? 🙄

Clearly @lukigrl indicated a strong and common reaction to the unfairness potential of downvotes, and further demonstrated a common response: voting with her feet.

I propose that there will be competitors to Steemit soon. Any competitor that is perceived as more fair will outcompete Steemit, as @lukigrl has shown is highly likely.

This is a threat to Steemit's existence, by definition an existential threat.

Please do show where I have approached F'ed Up Disinformation, as I'm agin' it.

Also, you can apply semantics all you like, but at the end of the day, what people understand is that Steemit is like a market, not a political decision on a new tax.

I don't even have any idea, nor do most people, what you mean by a game metaphor system, or how it is different from the examples I have given, which people do understand.

I blame Steemit Inc. for trying to have things all ways. It's true the describe it with many metaphors, and a marketplace is one, a big one. Experience and research has shown me this is not the case, it doesn't fit the idea of a market.

Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, in your comments with me. You are supporting the stance that downvotes are taking away from what someone has earned and are implying that the future of Steem rest on this being fixed.

It's not semantics I'm applying but the ideas behind the words, while striving for accurate terms to use of course. I don't accept this being reduced to semantics.

Listen, I'm going to make a post on this, looks like it's needed. Shortly.

Well, I now have a new definition of FUD, for which I thank you.

You, after defining FUD, do clearly state my position. I am glad we do not misunderstand what I am trying to convey.

I was referring to the difference between metaphors as semantics. I apologize if that was unnecessary or inaccurate, but as the metaphors differences seem not to address the core issue, which is that a lot of people feel that downvotes do exactly as you state I state, I think that's the issue to address, rather than metaphors.

I look forward to your post. Thanks!

Your welcome and glad we see each other clearly in some ways 😜 I hope to have it written soon.