I've always been an advocate of freedom of stake and also speech.
I don't think I am the one who missed anything though, I read every line and every response.
I think many of you missed the heart of the debate, which was focused on adoption,
Not function.
It would have been very easy to take even 1 percent of the responses and say,
"This is unacceptable" to the person who's behavior was outrageous.
That alone would have gone a long way. Words are words, I don't get too upset about them, but when you are critical and come up with theories on why someone would post here, I'm left wondering why anyone who doesn't need a few cents would post here.
The focus on making it not about rewards, means it has to be about user experience.
Oh.
I find it strange how you can separate adoption and function. They are strongly related.
If you read every line, then you also read that I don't think the goal of Hive should be "adoption at any cost". I stand by that. I believe Hive has to have a higher goal that just adoption and therefore profit for the token holders. I wouldn't spend my time on it if that was the only goal as I have enough money to live comfortably already.
One of those goals that I believe is important is to function as a place where people can form communities where they can speak their minds (and still control spam/insults from others).
Perhaps you're arguing that the setup of communities needs to be clearer, so that newcomers start out in a moderated community when they first join, so they aren't exposed to abusive language that they aren't used to (because centralized platforms are mostly moderated) or that they simply can't tolerate. That's certainly a position that I could see for debate.
But I didn't get the impression that such debate was of interest to cryptofinally. She seemed entirely focused on personal insults to her and never once replied with an argument for why communities couldn't solve this problem, and given she then went on to support dlike, I don't think I was wrong to think she's a very shallow thinker who is motivated by attention and the potential of profiting from shilling cryptocurrency.
I really do appreciate the thoughtful answers especially based on how I started the conversation.
While I know there are thoughts on improving the UI, being a deep thinker is generally not a requirement for social media end-user adoption. We both know this isn't an isolated "one-off" case.
Just being left alone to talk about whatever they want within their own circles is usually the goal. (to your point about communities)
I do appreciate the time, I'll keep an eye on developments.
Yes, and I don't demand deep thinking when it comes to debating problems with the platform. If someone keeps the focus on what those problems actually are, and responds to my points in turn, it helps me think about the problems too.
In fact, as you paid some attention to what I was saying and responded based on that, you got me thinking about a possible problem with people being aware of communities and at least one possible solution to that problem. OTOH, if you had ignored almost everything I said, and then looked for the one thing in what I said that seemed to support a personal grievance, then this discussion would have been a lot less productive. In other words, thanks for listening and commenting.
OMG
the issue is on the table now
Being back Drama token!
I designed it hoping to bring some fun and lighthearted engagement.
I'm completely unclear what Hive wants to attract. I already wasted funds on having it developed once.
I think I'll wait until some clearer plan develops.
do you need me to ship you some pills?