In the past 24 hours a debate has swirled up again around @hivewatchers, downvoting, autovoting, and in the broader sense just about the "cultural norms" of HIVE. In this particular instance @gric was downvoted for reposting artwork he had previously shared several years ago back on STEEM. If you want to review that discussion the post can be found here.
What initially started as my own intended comment in the discussion became far reaching and involved enough that I decided to spin it off into this post instead. So, following are some of my views and concerns, as well as an announcement of my own intentions for my account going forward so that in fair warning my own followers can adjust their following and voting habits as they see fit and @hivewatchers can keep an eye on me if it deems it appropriate!
On Being Pro Downvote...
First off, I'm pro downvote. Downvotes have a critical role, they are a right to exercise with stake, and quite frankly I don't believe defining a "valid" reason for downvoting is even a necessity. "I just didn't like it" is as good a reason as any for why a post was downvoted. I hate to see people reacting personally to being downvoted, although I recognize it's just a natural human reaction. Whether it's a downvote here with seeming monetary consequences, or a thumbs down on other sites that has no real bearing at all, people take such negative expressions toward them to heart. You'll notice I wrote "seeming" monetary consequences because I'm also a firm believer in expected post payouts not being real money until the close of voting.
On Being Pro Autovote...
I am absolutely a user of autovotes using the service provided by hive.vote. I believe auto voting needs to be more widespread and built directly into front end interfaces like PeakD. I like hive.vote's branding of autovoting as FanBase. In my mind it's a step up from a normal follow and is the closest thing we have to something like Patreon. With tools to quantify a running tally of how much monetary value a FanBase subscription has provided to the creator from each subscriber it could easily fill all the roles of a Patreon type service in assigning things like reward tiers and community rankings for the fans. I dislike the vilification of autovoting.
That being said I tailor my own autovotes and actively monitor them. Oftentimes it comes down to averages and considering the content creator's posting style, frequency, etc. If I absolutely love your stuff and you rarely post more than once a day then a full 100% autovote may be in order. Post more frequently, probably a 50% vote max. Post on a mix of topics where some I don't find quite as interesting as others... probably dropping down to 25% to balance it out. And of course I've absolutely dropped people off of autovoting if their content moves in a direction I no longer enjoy.
The Larger Picture
So how do those two stances fit into the current controversy? People can downvote @gric's posts if they like and I've got no problem with it. However I went ahead and added him to my autovotes to show more support going forward. If I feel his content is getting spammy then I will voluntarily remove my support. The idea others put forward that he's simply "milking" people's autovotes is irritating to me. In an ideal world we'd all simply use HIVE like we use other sites and social media and let the money take care of itself in the background. On every other platform artists recycling old artwork into their social media feeds is absolutely accepted, and to say that it's unacceptable on HIVE because you're "getting paid" for it is quite frankly bullshit. So I do take issue with that being one of @hivewatchers guiding principles and I wish people would only entrust stake to @hivewatchers to deal with clear cut spam and identity theft, and not to police these supposed community norms. I see good work that they do in those other areas and commend them, but I absolutely would never support any funding proposals or delegate stake to such a program with the questionable added scope discussed here.
I believe that aspect of @hivewatchers mission is a hindrance to HIVE. If you think a bit of undeserved money is going to someone for reposting something they shared a few years ago, or on another site... I don't care. Especially because we have to be brutally honest and realize that the money is basically all HIVE has to offer at this point.
I onboarded an artist friend over the summer. When he was first exploring HIVE he instantly recognized @gric's work and was a fan. He was excited to see him here. It gave HIVE some credibility in his eyes. He enjoyed exchanging a couple comments with him. Unfortunately, like most people who come on HIVE, he hasn't been active in 4 months. After HIVE he started experimenting with Tiktok and that's where he's having a blast now, gaining thousands of followers, getting some view counts into the millions, and not a penny earned. Right now we do not offer creators the chance to build an audience of any significant size or gain the type of exposure of their work that is meaningful for their careers. So if you think someone is just posting for the money then maybe they are... but in my opinion we should be happy to pay it because userbase and retention are all that matters right now and we need to retain assets like @gric.
The Scope of HIVE
"You're reposting old artwork, we have to downvote you for that."
"You're making lots of "low quality" posts with just a picture and a sentence, we have to downvote you for that."
People's views of what HIVE is are far too limited. Because the first interface ever invented focused on blogging then in many people's eyes that's what it's for, and rambling on in posts like I am now is the "proper" way to do it. And our major front end interfaces don't help the growing culture clash by presenting the entirety of the blockchain in one format that's designed with this sort of long form written content in mind.
If you haven't heard, there's a new HIVE based site, liketu.com and I'm very excited for it and the rise of others like it. We had some in the past on the old chain like Steepshot and Appics which focused on an experience more akin to Instagram which I found very appealing and enjoyed experimenting with.
I just logged in today to confirm what I assumed to be the case and there it is... a nice fresh, blank profile page for me to fill. You see, Liketu only displays posts intended for it, made through its own site. It's a system that other HIVE based sites utilize and I believe is becoming a necessity for our current "core" sites.
While every HIVE based site and app gets the benefit of tapping into the existing userbase at startup, they all get to grow in their own directions, onboard users who may not use any other HIVE based sites and services, and develop their own cultures and norms. Applying the perceived social standards that have developed on PeakD, hive.blog, or eCency with a one size fits all sledgehammer is the worst approach we can take right now. We've seen it happen on numerous occasions as sites that focus on images, micro-blogging, fitness tracking or memes have sprung up and get lambasted. They run their own sites and apps, do their own thing, try to leverage the blockchain in new and exciting ways, and end up in wars because the existing interfaces aren't designed to effectively filter or sort content from different sources and inputs to the central blockchain.
I bring this up both for those who feel the need to audit "post quality" and as an example of the untenableness of @hivewatchers and some community member's position on reposting content. There's a very good chance I'm about to become a HIVE sinner and end up in the penalty box. I want to experiment with Liketu, use it, and support it. So I'm going to post some of my artwork on that pretty blank profile page up there, and you know what? It's going to show up in the feeds on all the blogging front ends as "recycled low quality shitposting" even though I did nothing to put it there and had no choice. That interconnectedness is both the strength of the HIVE ecosystem, and its biggest weakness if it's not used and filtered properly.
I can hear now the comments of some saying that all I'd have to do is decline payout... but I'm not going to! HIVE inherently ties voting and its corresponding monetary payout to visibility and exposure. As a 5+ year veteran I would much rather start off on Liketu and the myriad of new HIVE powered platforms I believe are to come with the advantage of some autovotes and a backlog of existing content to roll out than handicapping myself with a string of declined payouts or refusing to post any of my portfolio to date at all.
Finale!
Whew that was a ramble/rant... or as I like to call them, "blaaaghs." To wrap up I'll just hit a few bullet points.
- I'd like to give a heartfelt thanks to everyone who is following and voting my content.
- I advocate that everyone keep an eye on my content in the future and unvote, unfollow, downvote as you see fit to.
- However I'd implore everyone to really take a look at everything that HIVE can encompass, and examine the evolving social norms in that context.
- And to @hivewatchers and other content quality enforcers, let's just say I'm planning on "pulling a @gric." I am going to use a brand new HIVE powered site as it's intended to be used. The content will be new to that site, but will already exist on other HIVE powered sites. That content will be mirrored to HIVE front ends that make the choice to aggregate the entire blockchain rather than foster their own site and app specific communities and be seen as a duplicate or "repost." I will receive automated votes that I do not solicit or trade for and have no control over. If you downvote me I'm fine with that, but please don't bother with the automated comment as to why, because I already know that like @gric, I'll have done nothing "wrong" and won't plan on changing my behavior in the future.
-Bryan "the Imp" Imhoff
Follow me for more behind the scenes looks at the creation of "I Thought It Would Be Zombies..." Your votes help support its production! Also look for limited edition digital artwork for sale on NFTShowroom.com
The idea that something posted on Hive should be downvoted simply because it had been posted elsewhere seems brain-dead to me. That said, accounts are free to downvote for whatever reason, even a brain-dead one.
And, there was (is?) a long tradition of people reposting content using the #repost tag. There are after all newbies who aren’t going to search for year-old content from someone they’re following, as well as people who originally voted for it who are long gone.
This particular instance was all "on HIVE" in its duplication, but I've absolutely seen what you're describing of content that's not exclusive to HIVE also being downvoted or overall seen as low quality or lesser.
I'm all for valuing things like authenticity and engagement, but unfortunately most of these hangups and criticisms that our HIVE community has developed are centered so firmly around policing that dollar figure on a post. In the process these norms actually go against both the content strategies used by serious creators and businesses on other social media, and the desires and inclinations of casual users and content consumers as well.
Many here have yet to move beyond the this is a get paid for blogging Web 2.0 site mindset.
Five years ago that may have been true, but it’s so much more than that now.
The issue here is it's not "someplace else", it's the same chain, I can look it up right now on peakd. Another is that 3 of his identical posts had the same voter on it. Even if one were to use the excuse that "well it didn't get much rewards the first time/price was low back then, etc" that's still not how hive posts and curation works. It's meant to be a 1 shot at it for a specific piece of content to accept rewards on it, to gain a following, autovoters, etc, not to keep reposting the same content over and over and start recycling it after x time has passed. If it's not about the rewards then repost it with declined rewards or it going to the DHF or Null. Hive stake is different from other revenue generation, we're not taking ad money from a company to give to authors, frankly I'm surprised no hive front-end has ad revenue generation to share with whoever gets the most attention to begin with for evergreen content or to repost things on purpose for that with declined post rewards. Hive stake you may have earned 4 years ago would have grown by a lot more by now and that's one of the beauties of it and why it should be limited to be earned once per a specific content.
@bryan-imhoff
It was posted on S T E E M I T. That part of Steem blockchain makes also a part of hive blockchain until march of 2020. They share teh same history until that. Anything posted on Steemit before March 2020 is part of the Hive ecosystem.
IT DOES NOT OWE ANYTHING TO ANYONE!!!
PARTICULARLY SOME SORT OF SALARY FOR SOME ARROGANT AND SELF-ENTITLED ARTIST WITH AN INFLATED SENSE OF IMPORTANCE WHO THINKS THAT HE SHOULD BE REWARDED.
He is welcome to attempt to get "free money" on Facebook, Insta, Twitter etc. I am sure that they will give him "free money" for whatever he posts.
Autovote is awesome, I agree too I should be incorporated into the more mainstream dapps UI
About reposting old art, such a grey area...I've done it myself and also got downvoted 🤷♂
I get the POV that it could be classified as abuse, if done too frequently...but as you said if another dapp focused on art appears I will likely repost my old art there, because it will be new on that dapp and I will want to show my best works there.
Abuse is such a vague term, it makes me think of a famous court case where a film had been labeled as hard core pornography and unlawfully banned and a Justice issued a ruling with a well known quote.
Just like you can look at something and just know it’s not porn, I look at a lot of posts labeled as “abuse” and just don’t see it! I see people using HIVE like they would any other social media and that’s to be encouraged.
When accounts are egregiously reposting, spammy, attempting to milk their follower’s votes, I believe it’s largely self correcting and results in being unfollowed, unvoted, muted in communities, and downvoted by individuals but I see no reason for involvement by an organization like Hivewatchers except when countering the types of automated spam campaigns posting & voting thousands of comments daily that we’ve seen in the past. I really appreciate their resources and mission then. I just feel like some of their definitions of abuse are far too loose and subjective and amount to a sort of “mission creep” akin to the military launching drone strikes on jaywalkers! 😆 I know I wouldn’t want to live in that country, and unfortunately we do see people not wanting to “live” in HIVE when they see these sorts of rules and responses.
Sometimes democratic processes do good and sometimes they don't, but it is still the best system!
100% agree. And the messy side effect is that complaints and discussions are part of that democratic process. When dealing with a nebulous community standard in a situation like this, I think it's imperative to revisit that standard on a regular basis, particularly with a community poised to change and grow as much as HIVE. We cannot allow the first 10,000 users to dictate terms to the next 10 Million. That's a path to failure...
When I first joined I think I was on your auto vote list and have to say, I VERY much appreciate it. I tried to be really active and you supporting what I posted was motivating to continue being active here on Hive. I've slacked a lot lately... but still try to lurk the comic content and stuff and upvote at least.
I don't like the policing of content on Hive. Never have. I get it and all, just don't like it. I think the platform would be better off without it. The 'good' it does is negligible in the grand scheme. The optics it provides on the other hand can be potentially long term damaging and off-putting to new users and people that may have joined but won't now.
I kick myself all the time for slacking off on HIVE! But I'll always be looking forward to some more of your cool comic content and am happy to show a little support. Happy New Year to you!
Glad to see someone with common sense commenting on the issue. By the way, isn't it interesting that one of these "watchers" created an account named @hivegestapo? This will certainly be a great addition to @hivewatchers downvote bot militia!
Based on the creating account it doesn't seem to be tied to the "official" @hivewatchers accounts at all, but that just speaks to the root problems of
I particularly like the whole "Waaaahhh, Muh Rewards!" attempt at mockery. They seem oblivious to the irony that the entire concept of anti-abuse downvoting is centered around people lamenting that those posts are taking away from their own rewards. 🤷♂
Don't disagree that they often come off as very unprofessional and have had a lot of disagreements with them in the past, in this case I can't really help but agree with their use of downvotes and that's why I helped bring the rewards down on the reposts.
Please, STOP spreading lies about Hivewatchers. This account has nothing to do with Hivewatchers and none of their members has created it.
It feels like you're a bit biased over this user based on previous experience and him being an excellent artist, so kind of hard to see past that in this post about some of your other points. Everyone should be treated equally and the "social consensus" rules should be towards everyone. It's quite obvious by now that a lot of autovotes go unsupervised, though, which often lead to them being abused. I don't have anything against them either but I try my best not to just wildly accept them no matter what I post and in this case it seems as a low effort post when a user reposts something that already exists here. On the other hand the great thing is that thankfully most downvotes that I know are manual and carefully placed.
I wouldn't say biased, but being involved mostly with the art community here and elsewhere it means that this particular case was more likely to draw my attention and interest. But I've spent a bit of time today reviewing Hivewatchers last monthly report and I have a difficult time finding any "spam" reports that I would classify as such or see any reason for Hivewatchers to get involved. Yes there's people there recycling 4 year old posts and getting "caught." And the last one I looked at the post had earned .51 four years ago from 4 voters and the earnings on the repeat post were from completely different people which speaks to the fact that recycling previous content often puts it in front of a new audience. There are even Actifit users getting warned because they don't use a brand new photo when they pretty up each of their daily step counts.
The "social consensus" that's being placed on HIVE is quite opposite to how 99% of users interact with all other social media (fast, casual, low effort, high frequency, unoriginal content, etc.) and I think that shows in our stagnant userbase. It's also not a one size fits all approach that can and should be enforced across multiple websites and applications that may be designed with very different expectations in mind.
My position is simply that there are infractions that can be agreed upon much more readily. Identity theft, phishing attacks, vote buying schemes, and true spam in the form of automated mass commenting, etc. Those can be considered "laws", and I feel comfortable with a powerful entity like Hivewatchers enforcing them. Social norms should be left to individual communities, apps, and people to influence. In the real world I wouldn't want the police to get involved because I wore the same shirt to work three days in a row.
Lastly, if that no-repost rule is truly a consensus that was reached by the community, then it needs to be revisited at regular intervals because the community is changing and newcomers should be helping to shape the platform rather than be dictated to and told what HIVE is and how it's to be used. What was consensus a year and a half ago might not be now. So discussions (often arising out of complaints of course!) like these should inherently be a part of the platform, however whiny and irritating they may seem!
As a curator I don't really agree that that's a rule that should be revisted and eventually allowed to happen because some people think so, not to mention because it happens on other platforms. It's hard enough to curate posts and giving them the benefit of the doubt that they're not attempting to abuse or all the other things you listed that are plain @hivewatcher material, because even those are hard to track often and there's many times some that get away for some time with it before they're found out. If manual curators would need to check each time for reposts and how much a post earned way back, etc, it would be a nightmare if such practices would be allowed. Not to mention how quickly it would become overwhelmed by many others and suddenly you'd have a repost fest ongoing with those who do often get a lot of autovotes or votes making the most of it - that's just how it is, many who do get autovotes tend to often degrade in quality and effort behind the posts too and make sure to consistently post daily to get those votes. Either way, I'm not against putting it up for a vote and seeing how many would actually think reposts should be considered okay to be curated again but I wouldn't just think it's many or judge the amount based off of comments in this post as it seems to have attracted many who either have had altercations with hivewatchers in the past and a grudge about it or have reposted themselves.
Hive and formerly Steem were meant to be free from the policing and censorship of mainstream social media. Unfortunately there are certain large stake holders on this platform which abuse their stake to enforce their own rules, making for environment little better than what we all wanted to leave behind.
If Hive never moves beyond this, it will never see the growth that many hope for.
My focus is 100% on that hoped for growth you mention! I don't decry anything on HIVE as censorship and think the decentralized structure is quite strong. I just feel some of Hivewatchers actions are plain bad marketing and the reward of "saving" a few dollars of content rewards doesn't pay for the risk of alienating users. In an ideal world we'll see a growth of users that simply renders Hivewatchers and others like it ineffective and unable to police community norms on that scale, leaving it instead to actual communities, apps, and individuals.
As far as I understood it the user had been warned in the past. What would the next step be in your opinion as to not alienate them?
🤷♂ Leave them alone? I admit, I've seen plenty of people vehemently complain about Hivewatchers and downvotes when they've been caught for repeated plagiarism, identity theft etc. Those folks can go pound sand. This conversation is entirely around whether the idea of "no reposts" is good and valid. If enough people are complaining about it, then it may mean that it's not as much of a consensus as thought. In my post and opinions I'm making it pretty clear that I can foresee myself reposting content in the future, and if I get warnings from Hivewatchers I will ignore them and face whatever consequences.
Honestly, in a future with even more front end options, how do you see this playing out? If there are three art-centric front ends all powered by HIVE, displaying content only posted through their own interfaces, and I'd like to participate on each of them, the rule is going to be that you have to choose one to monetize and decline rewards on all others? It just doesn't make sense. While HIVE is small it's been okay to think of it as the community, but as we've grown and grow more it really needs to be thought of as an infrastructure... not a community. The success of HIVE will come when people are using sites and apps powered by HIVE without even knowing it... and at that point does it make any sense if an account called Hivewatchers drops into the comment section on someone's Liketu account and tells them that they're not using it right?
The data is already on the blockchain, new dapps could show your history and implement your past posts, doesn't mean you will need to repost them again or that doing so is okay just because you're using a new dapp, imo. The difference could be if they are rewarding you with their own token, then just accept that but not hive rewards and repost at your heart's content.
Think of it this way, a new dapp could easily also do something similar to cross-posts on peakd; "hey everyone this comment we placed here under your old post will create a new post on our dapp and show that post but the difference is that everyone can re-vote it now, whether or not the same people we don't care". This is the same amount of effort that reposting is. If you want to repost for the attention/visibility/growth of your following/new autovotes, etc, then do it, just don't accept curation as post rewards for something you've already been rewarded for (doesn't matter if curators didn't find it at the time cause you were new or whatever, as I said in a post somewhere earlier in a comment the post itself is proof you've put effort into finding curation, followers, etc). A better comparison would be with some youtube channels that take weeks to generate new content, if Kurzgesagt suddenly reposted a video from 3 years ago without saying anything I'm sure people would be like wtf? Even tho it's just adrevenue money going to it that doesn't affect any viewers or youtube shareholders - here it does, it's inflation that could go to others who are putting in the effort to post new content that hasn't been posted yet and that's what the Hive consensus wants/is in agreement of, originality and fresh stuff. Either way not really sure how else I can explain this but I'm pretty sure the majority of stakeholders would be against this no matter through what dapp if it's about Hive curation rewards.
Happy new year.
Alienate? How and by whose authority?
I see talk about consensus, but absolutely see none of that, when self-appointed big stake holders "speak" for the community.
Consensus on Hive is in the order of when we vote changes to code / blockchain. The community truly gets to say.
I too have also in the past fallen afoul of big stake holders moralizing. @gric may earn more for his posts, but he is by no means raping the rewards pool. There are others on this platform that earn far more than what he does.
This downvoting of his content punishes not only him but also those that chose to vote for his content. It is their voting power and they are free to give it where they wish.
And before you say anything about automatic votes, bots or whatever, that is not the case here.
If big stake holders think that other content is more deserving, then by all means use that voting power to reward content they they think deserves it rather than burning the votes of smaller stake holders with down votes.
I vote for @gric's content because I like it. So what if there is a bit of recycling of content, he publishes way more original content on this platform. Hive needs content creators like him. But if this petty minded authoritarianism persists on Hive, it is going to die a slow death as original content creators give up and leave.
We came here for a censorship free network, and yet people seem to want to enforce that very thing here.
So what if some don't agree with it and downvote it.
You've (intentionally?) left out some import points I made, large stake holders can wipe out small. Having more stake does not make one more moral or righteous but more capable of abuse.
Some how I get the feeling that if you were on the receiving end, your attitude would be somewhat different.
Sorry, but is this a reposter convention? It's hard to take this comment seriously when you both have been downvoted for the same thing and feel that it's unfair.
Huh? Since when have I been down voted for reposting? Now you're making stuff up.
Don't know what trip you're on, but it's one that not in touch with reality. Seems to be you feel some counter criticism is unfair.
What are you afraid of? You're sitting high and mighty with your stake and down vote to oblivion anyone you like and a few critical words rile you up.
Looking at your own profile... I don't see any original content, only reposts. So that's pretty rich that you think you can call people out on their own original content that they recycle.
I've been hit with downvotes for reposting years old content as well. I get that constant reports can amount to spam but this was stuff originally posted on Steem before Hive existed. The image links were broken and there were other minor updates/fixes to make and it didn't really make sense to update the old post. Addressing abuse is important but to me that's going way too far.
Do you know what happened with steem? Did it merge with Hive or morph into it? I can’t transfer anything out of steem now. What happened?
Hoo boy! It was a whole thing! 😂 Short basic is that Steem basically got taken over by Justin Sun(Tron) via some very shady means and most of the community splintered off to Hive. So Hive is more technically a "fork" of Steem so since it's creation the two chains have evolved separately. You should still be able to move your coins off Steem but it definitely lost some exchange listing or services like BlockTrades. I'd perhaps look into https://steem-engine.net/
I honestly haven't followed the news to know if it's still fully up and running, haven't done anything on Steem in almost two years now, but at least at the outset they had a way to move tokens between Steem-Engine and Hive-Engine.
You could also try https://exchange.ionomy.com/en/markets/btc-steem
I used Ionomy to convert some BLURT to HIVE and I don't think they require any KYC registration and do have a STEEM market there.
Thank you so much for an explanation! I’ll try your suggestions to move my steem.
you can google what happened to steem, as for transfering tokens from steem to hive, I believe you can still use "Hive-Engine" for that
Thanks for your reply. I’ll try again tomorrow to move my steem. I had no idea so much had occurred!
@tipu curate
Upvoted 👌 (Mana: 19/79) Liquid rewards.
Congratulations @bryan-imhoff! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s):
Your next target is to reach 49000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out the last post from @hivebuzz:
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!