RE: Self-Voting: Scammy Behavior, Rational ROI, or Something Else?

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Self-Voting: Scammy Behavior, Rational ROI, or Something Else?

in steemit •  7 years ago 

Understandable, but many of the comments here disagree with you, some quite passionately so. What's the best approach to reconcile those differences?

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:  

Steemit is SUPPOSED to be a widely distributed, highly parallel, massively redundant network. That does NOT just apply to the software or the hardware. It also means the users. You can (and will) disagree passionately with what I say...I might not like what you have to say.

So?

Where is it written that we must agree with each other?

I get really damn tired of Social Justice Bullies trying to shame me into doing what THEY say I should do. They can take a fly jump into a rolling hula hoop as far as I'm concerned. I'll do and say what I damn well please.

The best approach is no approach at all. Do NOTHING. If you don't like the way I vote. MUTE ME.

Just like I've muted every damn bot I can identify.
NO I don't think the Social Justice Vigilante who coded Cheetah did a good thing. It was akin to turning a baby loose with a gattlling gun. If a user plagarizes...DON'T VOTE FOR HIM. With no votes the naughty boy get NO steam power. With no steam power, no reputation....well?

What can he do?

Oh I know..he and his friends can form voting pools. Oh yeah..they can complain, whine, bitch and moan about how UNFAIR steemit is.

FaceBook is just sitting there...or Twitter, Reddit, or a hundred other platforms that may be more to their liking.

Yes, we can all do as we please, but the communities we are in and the values of those communities do directly influence our preferences. We are a social species, even if the changes are subconscious. You can disagree with me there, but I think there's quite a bit of research to back that up. Thinking about community norms and discussing them openly makes a lot of sense, especially if we have strong opinions on an issue.

The plagiarism issue has been brought up before as far as the systemic risk it brings to the entire platform. If governments around the world target Steem blockchains (and witnesses who host them) as havens for copyrighted material and plagiarism, we're all going to have a bad day. It's not just about rewards and reputation it's about protecting what we value.

But I do agree with your general sentiment. It's tiring hearing people whine and complain about how terrible and unfair Steemit is. Clearly they care very deeply about it and want to see it improve. Not everyone agrees on what those improvements should be, which is why I think open, respectful discussion is so important.