RE: @abit Saved Your Ass on Steem And Many Don't Know This Information, Time To Vote For @abit As Witness

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

@abit Saved Your Ass on Steem And Many Don't Know This Information, Time To Vote For @abit As Witness

in witness •  6 years ago 

I do think I contradict myself constantly on Steemit, because I'm usually brainstorming out loud. To be honest, after all these months—I still feel like I only understand a tiny fraction of the dynamics of how Steemit works (especially when you consider the psychological aspect, which continually baffles me.) If you don't mind continuing the conversation tomorrow when I'm more well-rested, I'd be happy to :-) In the meantime, give me some food for thought from your perspective if you like because I'm curious what you think about it.

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:  
  ·  6 years ago (edited)

In the framework of psychology, blame, shame and condemnation alike serve the purpose of expressing the level of disagreability one has for another's actions or inactions. In the context of voteselling, and even worse, vote buying if you don't condemn it, it's either excused, or marginalized, or outright endorsed by silence or even worse by the approval and encouragement of others and as it gathers socital approval the worse and worse the practice will become. What will become of this place as this practice gains acceptance?

Many marginalized the issue or outright shifted the blame to "the code" yet this practice only happened and continues so because people with stake haven't the incentive of checking it, and thus making such abuse not profitable and therefore a fruitless or outright painful endeavor. Why do people without stake lack the incentive to check it? Because people have, for as long as steem has been around, considered that code ought to deem what is blame worthy, what is shame worthy and what's outright condemnable. It's a sad state when people aren't capable of discerning such things for themselves and it's a sadder thing that so many lack the moral witherall that they would rather coddle those who beg for code to ordain morality instead of dismissing them as nonsensical and lacking the moral fortitude and integrity and declaring that they themselves are responsible for recognizing what is good, what isn't or what is neither. So, for me, someone without the stake to actually flag such abuse, the only way out of this quagmire is to voice my complete disapproval of it or outright condemn such practice and signal to others that there's a response to abuse that doesn't require code changes, a response from those whom haven't the stake, so that maybe, no matter how insurmountable it may seem, others who have stake join in. On the opposite spectrum are those who have sung the same nonsense and have displayed a lack of integrity and do so either because they think nothing of community or of the future, regardless of what they say counter to that, or simply are disingenuous so that some abusive users will reward their support of such condemnable behavior. I find it despicable either way.

Loading...

I suspect you’re dead on. The masses often ruin their own caves by polluting it. I think that has happened.

Posted using Partiko iOS

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

Until downvoting is inventivized to check the abuse, either by code changes or communal support or outright pressure by the many or a combination nothing will get better. I heard of a good alternative to it, a free market approach but then in the process we will trade our curation for a total vote market/exchange, and I don't agree with the author that curation is broken. There's very compelling arguments to say the least and it'll take some digestion, at first thought maybe this is the free market approach I postulated some time ago which will require bid bots to rethink their game and so maybe my sentiments of "the people coming together" are simply my naivite of "most people are good", but I'm cautious of the free market approach as to deal with consolidated wealth being used to speculate and exploit the system in turn and how abuse will be dealt with then. The whole "hf 20 and SMTs are gonna fix it" is ridiculously insane since I know of nothing in that which will even attempt at addressing the issue. In my view, Steem is definitely not the masses, the level of thought from the community by and large is an indication of that, but there are a lot of reserved people and quite a few sitting on their hands as well.

I agree people are sitting on their hands but I also agree most people are good!

I think the problem extends from the ability to generate income from the bidbots and not necessarily from the people using the services. Simple solution is promotion should not be allowed with a gamble of generating an income but then I ask how do we police this situation? I have seen Mrs. Sanders and others make an attempt but without being able to generate an ROI there is no whale support making it a very uneven playing field.

Posted using Partiko iOS

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

I suggested a simple and sensible soultion which would get things rolling: make the steemit homepage the promoted tab, thus driving a demand to actually use the promoted function and in turn steadily increasing SBD demand and bringing up the value of STEEM while consequently removing any excuse of using bidbots for promotion. Making such a change will signal that the stake holders have gained much needed approval to flag the abuse, because in reality how much flagging are the vote sellers and vote buyers gonna put up with once the only excuse behind it is not veiled thinly in promotion and everyone knows it's about bidding and throwing the dice on getting an ROI. If steemit doesn't act and continues to sit on their large stake it's hard to imagine people coming together, because I have no doubt that the large majority of people are inherently good, however they are also not going to stick out their neck when it could cost them everything and that's why steemit needs to take charge and use their stake to promote flagging abuse. In an ideal situation they would have given everyone tools to effectively do that or at least incentives to downvote.

We can’t really expect human nature to change?

Posted using Partiko iOS