Hm. I thought this post of his was an attempt to quell the drama, not to escalate it. I worry that we will lose a very good content creator in this brou-ha-ha. It would not be the first such loss.
I wrote out the above response to you a few minutes ago, but got scared it would bring bad vibes my way and deleted it. Now I have returned with my response because I object to my feeling that I have to be careful not to offend you, or other whales, whom I have previously offended by arguing on this very subject - self-upvoting and ensuing downvotes. I already craft my posts so that I don't overly displease anyone; I speak carefully so that I don't bring that downvoting weapon down on my own head. Is this what we want here? Tricky subject! One that folks get quite caught up in, and does bear some calm looking into, which is what I feel tobetada is trying to do.
Interesting that you and I disagree on the tone we each heard him use. I thought it sounded like a genuine and fair attempt to discuss manners on the Hive blockchain. Having brought some related wrath down on my own head for trying to discuss that same thing, I am very sensitive to the vengefulness of the comments he received, and can 100% understand his wanting to clear the air.
The first one was extremely important - how else are we going to talk about the "values" we have here? I find it most curious that trying to have an open discussion about an apparently sensitive topic is so ill conceived by many. I was always of the opinion that shining light onto the dark spots is generally a rewarding experience. At least I learned a lot.
As I said in my other comment - this conversation is very very old.... It is not a dark spot you are shining a light on, and if you were paying any attention since you joined in 2017, you would know that.
This was supposed to be a reflective post on the first one - after such a strong reaction it would be crazy not to have one. There was a lot to think about and process, no? I posted it in your community "reflections" which I thought was very fitting. Should I point you to some real drama queen posts? 🙄
after such a strong reaction it would be crazy not to have one.
The strong reaction wasn't to your post about self voting - people just commented how they saw it. If there was a "strong" reaction, it was to you tagging people and pointing them out as self voters, without really doing much research into it at all. As said, I don't think the first post was necessary to begin with - it is an old and tired topic that keeps coming up - but you have been around a long time already, so the assumption is that you would have a pretty good understanding of the basic culture around it.
it's still good to have it imo since there are many newcomers every now and then. I find it really odd that tagging a handful of people is the thing that upsets most here. While my research was superficial - I did point that out - it simply wanted to highlight such behavior. And so far all I am seeing is that people self voting are actually tolerated and I appear to be the scape goat.
And so far all I am seeing is that people self voting are actually tolerated and I appear to be the scape goat.
Scapegoat? You are overestimating the importance of this. I know it feels like a big thing to get the attention, but on the grand scale of life - it isn't that important. And, when it comes to people self-voting, they can do it as they please - many will get downvoted for it, many will not get votes. As I see it, it is a frequency thing, and a size of the stake thing. In the background, I first defended you for self-voting due to you not posting much - but then you decided to make a thing out of it. That is fine - your prerogative. The responses are proportional. I think most people were pretty open and understanding, and even the people who you tagged without researching weren't too aggressive. Yet, the next post is that you call it a shitstorm. Perhaps you haven't really seen a shitstorm before.
I get it. However, on one hand you are saying it is good for new people, but on the other you have said that you have been blind to all of this in the past. It is somewhat disingenuous isn't it? The discussion is fruitful for you, and hopefully you learn something from it. But I am not sure how fruitful it is for many others who actually took the time to comment again on this, for someone who should have known about it anyway. So, is it a lesson for new people, or just an attempt to get some engagement through a bit of drama?
I put myself in the spotlight for asking a basic question, well knowingly that this could "backfire". I don't see how that could really lead to anything positive for me in terms of getting better post payouts. I am probably now stuck with a $5 downvote from a person that felt "hurt" for tagging him and another one that just acts as a bully. Probably just going to start burning the payouts from now, since the drama for a couple of bucks is not worth it - It's only problematic that this also affects reach.
Hm. I thought this post of his was an attempt to quell the drama, not to escalate it. I worry that we will lose a very good content creator in this brou-ha-ha. It would not be the first such loss.
Not so sure as of yet. I don't think the first post of these was necessary - and I think this one is less so.
Interesting that you and I disagree on the tone we each heard him use. I thought it sounded like a genuine and fair attempt to discuss manners on the Hive blockchain. Having brought some related wrath down on my own head for trying to discuss that same thing, I am very sensitive to the vengefulness of the comments he received, and can 100% understand his wanting to clear the air.
The first one was extremely important - how else are we going to talk about the "values" we have here? I find it most curious that trying to have an open discussion about an apparently sensitive topic is so ill conceived by many. I was always of the opinion that shining light onto the dark spots is generally a rewarding experience. At least I learned a lot.
As I said in my other comment - this conversation is very very old.... It is not a dark spot you are shining a light on, and if you were paying any attention since you joined in 2017, you would know that.
This was supposed to be a reflective post on the first one - after such a strong reaction it would be crazy not to have one. There was a lot to think about and process, no? I posted it in your community "reflections" which I thought was very fitting. Should I point you to some real drama queen posts? 🙄
The strong reaction wasn't to your post about self voting - people just commented how they saw it. If there was a "strong" reaction, it was to you tagging people and pointing them out as self voters, without really doing much research into it at all. As said, I don't think the first post was necessary to begin with - it is an old and tired topic that keeps coming up - but you have been around a long time already, so the assumption is that you would have a pretty good understanding of the basic culture around it.
it's still good to have it imo since there are many newcomers every now and then. I find it really odd that tagging a handful of people is the thing that upsets most here. While my research was superficial - I did point that out - it simply wanted to highlight such behavior. And so far all I am seeing is that people self voting are actually tolerated and I appear to be the scape goat.
Scapegoat? You are overestimating the importance of this. I know it feels like a big thing to get the attention, but on the grand scale of life - it isn't that important. And, when it comes to people self-voting, they can do it as they please - many will get downvoted for it, many will not get votes. As I see it, it is a frequency thing, and a size of the stake thing. In the background, I first defended you for self-voting due to you not posting much - but then you decided to make a thing out of it. That is fine - your prerogative. The responses are proportional. I think most people were pretty open and understanding, and even the people who you tagged without researching weren't too aggressive. Yet, the next post is that you call it a shitstorm. Perhaps you haven't really seen a shitstorm before.
I am not though. I am simply thinking of this as a fruitful discussion :)
I get it. However, on one hand you are saying it is good for new people, but on the other you have said that you have been blind to all of this in the past. It is somewhat disingenuous isn't it? The discussion is fruitful for you, and hopefully you learn something from it. But I am not sure how fruitful it is for many others who actually took the time to comment again on this, for someone who should have known about it anyway. So, is it a lesson for new people, or just an attempt to get some engagement through a bit of drama?
I put myself in the spotlight for asking a basic question, well knowingly that this could "backfire". I don't see how that could really lead to anything positive for me in terms of getting better post payouts. I am probably now stuck with a $5 downvote from a person that felt "hurt" for tagging him and another one that just acts as a bully. Probably just going to start burning the payouts from now, since the drama for a couple of bucks is not worth it - It's only problematic that this also affects reach.