One of the founding and guiding principles of the FreeCompliments Community is the freedom to express whatever content you like without fear of suppression. It is something that I, as the founder, hold very dear to heart, having seen the effects of suppression on my family members before they came to the United States.
Of course, this is a broad topic which opens up many different schools of thought and criticisms. On Web 3.0, with Hive's monetization model, this becomes even more complicated.
Our Policy on Plagiarism
We 100% will not support direct plagiarism of content. If you copy someone's work, whether it be text, images, art, etc., it must come with a source. If you do not do this, then you are effectively earning money off of someone else's work without providing them credit, which is equivalent to theft, and theft is illegal. This will not be tolerated and will not be curated.
We've already dealt with a case of plagiarism. Our approach was one of teaching and forgiveness. We strongly believe that it is possible for someone to make changes to their behavior without resorting to harsh measures and processes to redeem themselves. I believe that the ability to forgive someone is a virtue, as it is not easy to do and requires genuine effort - but that it can also have lasting positive effects if implemented with proper teaching.
Conversation with Hivewatchers
Over the course of the past day, this difference of opinions has resulted in a disagreement between myself and hivewatchers. You can see the entirety of the conversation here. I will also post screenshots below.
I think it'll be much easier to read this within the link itself, but that's totally up to you!
An Analysis of the Situation (With My Own Bias)
In short, my point of view is that copied content, as long as it's completely sourced and posted only once, can add value as a form of social media. They may contain pieces of information or news that would otherwise not be seen by people if they are not shared. Hive is expanding in its scope, and snackable content is becoming more prevalent on the blockchain, something which we can see in spades on Threads, the center of microblogging activity.
As such, I believe that there is a place for such content on the blockchain, and particularly in our community. Censoring such posts would go against our principles of free speech, specifically permitting free exchange of ideas and content without the fear of censorship or negative repercussions.
I also believe that as an active and growing community, we can self-govern the content that we wish to have, and that a small group of outside actors with great stake should not cancel out the majority of individuals' perspectives.
Furthermore, I believe that we can reduce the burden on the rewards pools by curating such content with a minimal vote (just enough to surpass a dust, a.k.a. worthless vote). That way, we reward the benefits of sharing content while still encouraging original content with higher rewards and curation.
Now, some great points were brought up to counter this, particularly the questionable legality of earning rewards off of someone else's content if they did give express permission, even if the source is available. Is this fair use of content, or is it still plagiarism just because it's monetized? There are certainly arguments that could support either side of this. The 2nd to last comment by the SBI-booster account gave a strong description of the potential downsides.
Changes to HSBI Rewards
As per the wishes of the founder of HSBI, "While we believe that the choice of which accounts represent quality should be up to the individual, we agree that plagiarism, fraud, and minimal effort content should not receive a slice of the reward pool."
Since this discussion centered around content which is shared and links to the source without adding any additional content, we will respect the project's wish and, effective immediately, cease all HSBI rewards for such content.
However, we may still continue curation via our fc-curation and related community accounts. This is a decision I'm going to leave to our community members.
Our Choices - 3 Questions
Thus, I would like to put this concept to a community vote. We are specifically addressing content which copies directly from another source, but links and acknowledges the source. Here are the three questions which I will put up for a vote.
If you agree, please upvote or respond with "yes" or "agree." If you disagree, please downvote or respond with "no" or "disagree." Vote percentages will not be taken into consideration, so whether you want to use 0.1% or 100% is up to you - the vote will be identical.
These three questions will determine our next steps, and the freedom with which we permit posting within the community. My personal votes will align with what I have said previously (yes, yes, and no), and I will vote as a regular member, meaning my votes will be worth the same as everyone else's votes. I strongly encourage you to think about the information presented here and make your own decision. The more votes we receive, the better an idea we will have of what the community prefers.
Conclusion
We have a difficult decision to make regarding how we’re going to curate certain posts from now on. Your voice and opinion is very important and does matter, so I hope that you’ll participate in directing this community towards its best path. Thank you in advance for your participation!
Disclaimer: FreeCompliments will be a beneficiary for this post, and I will attempt to boost it via Ecency points as well.
Here’s a permanent invite link to the FreeCompliments Discord!
Follow our curation trail and earn 1 HSBI per month!
Posted Using InLeo Alpha
I think the copy of a content, with its source is useful if this content is developed and or discussed in the post.
Even more so if it leads to a real discussion in the comments.
On the other hand, there's so much abuse on Hive with compilations of posts that don't contribute any content and are real copy-pastes, and I'd like these posts to decline their rewards.
They want to highlight posts that might go unnoticed? Okay, but they shouldn't make any money on it, or else they should make the authors of the quoted posts 100% beneficiaries, without keeping a part for themselves.
Peace.
Appreciate you sharing your thoughts on this! Thanks so much.
Members of the FreeCompliments Community, we have some important updates regarding content curation, and an important decision for you to vote upon. Please take a look at this post and let em know your thoughts. Your opinion is of the utmost importance. Thank you all!
@gloreal @vladlau89 @dzoji @absurdanipal @carlosramirez @saqlain007 @curatorcat.leo @elianaicgomes @collinz @sadiabibi @madilyn02 @maggotmilk @sandrabastos @medicalroute @starbork @aadilmir @alkirua @bitphoto @liquidocelotytt @somospcd @preciousjewel1 @vaynard86 @maurojd @lasort @beeeee @eddqq @ayamihaya @mato712 @enkimaster @hunter.nxi @the13anarchist @yousuf68 @pulubengdugs @shiftrox @tanujaroy @germanandradeg @yiliandelgadoo @mirthepotato @peterock @suteru @dewabrata @opsin @timothyleecress @legra @jane203 @alessandrawhite @ashiru @rimurutempest @captainman @djandre @phanty @mendoliliana @zpek @vrezion @edith-4angelseu @yelimarin @eneayi @samiwrites @treysonmike @denissemata @sudeon @agreste @servelle @ijeomastories @bukkyj @hellsveiah @keithtaylor @rulivyxo @tejidorosa @nexo.voter @mrmiyagi @fjworld @kingvic1 @rqr4 @julie808 @sehrish-nosheen @bulliontools @lilla365 @untilwelearn @meraki7578 @lisamgentile1961 @ybf @alejandro1799 @magnacarta @floruth @irfanmustafa1 @morwhale @maryene @alohaed @saachi @vrezyy @philings @silarai @aezielove @devoice @mdaminulislam @chukwu10 @dooh92 @netlyn19 @metapiziks @javedkhan1989 @lfu-radio @darasimi @jeclyn60 @beauty197 @eniolw @artgirl @dreloop07 @peniel2010 @iam-siki @gregscloud @lia-velmont @antony02 @ijeomastories @brighto15g @deisip67 @diegoloco @hdmed @diosarich @joycy @oadissin @willythewhale @emotak @charlie-chain @makorirobinson @fiveat @oasiskp2 @mathewdaddywah @sonofluna @sifondeseltz @odogwuego @cjmorillo @sinaimndz @elfranklin @kopiko-blanca @arlenec2021 @rzc24-nftbbg @shemzy @graciel-chan @moclassic @prasiatko @kennymiracle @chm-writes @john0928 @giveandburn @shahwaleed86 @temidayo-bar @andestethic @sayury @edver143 @aminul101 @alfjo1 @ldylilith69 @joydukeson @untilwelearn @charliechain @travelflower @edeyglezsosa @boredoneeesan @maurojd @imohmitchel @gyakan1999 @ijebest @mintfinch @yusufopeyemi @lorylol @susielynn @d-a-d @usagidee @yoslehz @victor-praise @queena-242 @goldielove @dwayne16 @allama @koto-art @scentsgalore @mily23m @treasuree @fractoli @gabrielgetta20 @dfreitesp @egarysv @franciawrites @ebohehi @noradaniel @pazartesi @harbeegail @samueluche07 @kemmyb @felixfrancis @picna001 @liyuxiexie @big2 @kelvvyn @cryptounicorn420 @youngladpaul365 @mimismartypants @estelacha @piini123 @ruffatotmeee @lydiapauline @jenthoughts @mengao @jaynie @elderdark @stekene @city-of-dresden @omojuwa007 @pounce3087 @tife23 @wemah @zoemacsimeon @wrestlingdesires @tydynrain @henrietta27 @chrislybear @timehacker @uzoma24 @irfanmustafa @freakshow90 @pravesh0 @josephsavage @tonybad @naidu24j @peachyprincess @davot @amiegeoffrey @valeryc @joseal2020 @rosmiapure @elgeorge23 @spoonies @saleembk @mell79 @didiyilji @wongi.leo @resiliencia @simaroy @avatara @ckole @huntersmoon @jhymie @synergized @nanixxx @splash-of-angs63 @caleb-marvel @peacious @grantprof001 @daddydog @dwixer @chris-chris92 @kiara-jones @denmarkguy @yolimarag @beckyroyal @hopepascal @tengolotodo.leo @wongi @goingcrossroads @noctury @goodysam @ghua @fariha-faraz @starking7272 @manclar @the01crow @wealthwess @creacioneslelys @dayadam @acgalarza @liberius-1 @pepetoken @yoieuqudniram @anontechtube @olubunmiakinmade @fantagira @b0s @beluhan19 @imransoudagar @wendyth16 @bluekinabalu @earn.and.grow @olujose6 @dynamicrypto @zahidsun @peckypeace @lightpen @sommylove @iamjadeline @freedomprepper @abfarhan @yadamaniart @bigtakosensei @mammasitta @ozd @juva @fonestreet @modallas @balikis95 @blurtbuyback @theindiantrader @thebighigg @littlebee4 @chaosmagic23 @tokutaro22 @evih @olgavita @rkploy786 @no-advice @agbogo @fantagira7 @chillpill @born2rock @aquamarine @animaya @kingsleyy @kraken99 @mr-chuks @actioncats @nbarrios67 @tonyes @almostpeter @alphaleo @alanapan89 @fredaig @ifarmgirl @moeenali @thetimetravelerz @ikankaruk88 @tengolotodo @saggi07 @diodao @monica-ene @yeckingo1 @digi-me @whitneyalexx @mcoinz79 @city-of-berlin @george-dee @memess @atma.love @itsme9001 @beelove @ziabutt3836 @neilamarcano @caspermoeller89 @nony @kahkashan @beeber @avril.fortuin @mikezillo @pandamama @zakludick @lizelle @jfang003 @dailyspam @stickupboys @florakese @laurapalmerr @djynn @akipponn @bhattg @dbooster @pinkchic @christinepoulos @ecoinstant @arcgspy @ismartboy @mariela53 @artsyfunai @mviews @crazyphantombr @sperosamuel15 @ugomarcel @razzi11 @liquidocelot @jjmusa2004 @preparedwombat @artist-freepae @susurrodmisterio @imacryptogeek @funshee @whitelightxpress @almajandra @go-kyo @itwithsm @marilour @momogrow @lividvoice @hiveborgminer @lucia24 @summertooth @paulyoung1 @lifesadvice @sahidclement10 @caelum1infernum @elisaday7 @woodathegsd @katiej @smc.arike.oba @romanie @hive-197626 @luchyl @teknon @headwan @chairoul @lorennys @fizz0 @tikki00taffi @lady-bellar @palomap3 @uthantzin @melinda010100 @saffisara @ndk.focus @raj808 @ganjafarmer @stdd @jhymi @deraaa @eddylight @sequentialvibe @blacardi @ijelady @corvidae @bambukah @stayten @crrdlx @thekittygirl @jamerussell @wesphilbin
(If you were tagged, it’s because you’re an inaugural member – please let me know if you don’t want to be tagged and I’ll stop, pronto!)
Thanks of tagging me in order to help me get notified of the update easily.
Much respect to moderators
Thank you so much
!LUV
@oadissin sent you LUV 🙂 (1/1)
Made with LUV by crrdlx
cool
Thank you so very much, it´s so cute in this world need very love.
Thanks you so much
Hello, I'm here to tell you what I think about original content.
Content that is copied without adding anything is not original content! And in general, Hive's reward pool aims to reward creators of original content.
Whether or not to post in each community is up to the community leader to decide.
But any content copied with or without a source should have its reward refused if we think about the objective of the Hive pool and the consensus of the vast majority of users who have discussed this topic since I've known Hive.
Allowing rewards for non-original content is above the individual communities and is a function of the whole of Hive (and of course all the communities are part of Hive, but it can't be a "can in one and can't in the other" decision). And at the moment there is a consensus that the pool is to reward original content.
In any case, it's a complicated subject and always has to be analyzed very calmly. The work that the FC community does on Hive is incredible! But in my opinion giving support to copied content, with or without a source, is opening the door to big problems at Hive and all Hivers already know that we have enough problems to solve on our way.
As I said, this is just my opinion
Appreciate the input! And yes, the concept of "can in one and can't in the other" makes sense, too. I'm just wondering where the line can be drawn in terms of self-governance of a community versus entrusting a rather small entity to do such a job. That small entity with a large stake gives centralization vibes, if that makes sense, because it can end up controlling content the way it wants.
I understand the point about the general consensus across the entire blockchain, though. I wonder whether this tide would change as we introduce more snackable content, or whether we may eventually be able to recommend such posters to place their content in microblogs (such as Threads) rather than the standard blogs. That's a possible alternative!
If you want to know what I think will probably happen. In the future, Hive's reward pool will be removed or almost completely removed, and the communities will pay for the content within them with 2nd layers, just as much of the reward today happens in threads...
I wouldn't even be surprised if INLEO in the near future refuses to reward threads in HIVE and keeps the remuneration only in the second layer... Which would make sense because then they would have full control of the remuneration without depending on Hive's general consensus...
As for the line between self-governance of communities, in my mind it's quite clear (although I know that most people don't see it that clearly) that the communities themselves are proprietary, which means that the owners or moderators decide what kind of content should be posted there and how, but the reward pool is not the community's but Hive's and unfortunately today we only have a proposal to control it to avoid abuse... I confess that I would like this control to be more decentralized and certainly more people will be needed to do this work as Hive grows. I'm not going to go into the merits of how it's done today because in my opinion it's a fruitless discussion until we have another solution to combat abuse...
Interesting thoughts, and I think I did see mention at one point of each community having control over its own rewards. I think taskmaster may have mentioned this, although I don't recall clearly. It definitely has great merits in terms of decentralization!
While I can see this solving the issue of having a single fund that distributes among various communities, it seems like it would be dangerous to get rid of the pool of rewards on which the entire blockchain is based. After all, isn't HIVE the foundational token of the blockchain? I can't see how losing would do anything but fragment the chain into an indecipherable mess.
That said, I also don't have the experience nor knowledge to think this scenario through as others have, so I'll totally concede this to the smart people who have already done so! 😁
Surely the rewards in Hive wouldn't go away... Hive is the heart of the blockchain, without a pool that can be farmed unjustifiably the rewards would be reallocated... There are some proposals for reallocation and some advocate doing it now... I don't think it's time yet, but I also believe that the current model is not favorable for a network with a large number of content creators. It would be impossible to prevent abuse, the pool would be so diluted that the rewards would lose their meaning, so why keep it when you can direct the resources where they would make a real difference? But that's another discussion that has nothing to do with this one...lol
Incidentally, HW are funded by the Hive DAO, and they have votes 72% higher than the threshold. To all intents and purposes, they are the duly elected cop on the beat. I don't always love their methods, but the removal of rewards from illegal content is actually really important. (Check out Blurt sometime, or any of the other steem forks that did away with downvotes entirely, and you will be shocked at how much better Hive is)
And in the interest of full disclosure, I do vote for HW's funding proposals, which means by proxy so does Hive SBI with all of its resources.
https://peakd.com/hive/@hivewatchers/the-hivewatchers-and-spaminator-operational-proposal-for-the-period-2022-2024
Indeed, I do believe there's an important place for Hivewatchers on the blockchain! They absolutely catch bad actors, and I must acknowledge how difficult of a job it is to deal with them on a daily basis. I've had such experiences myself, albeit in a different capacity.
I also acknowledge that there's human error that will occur in such a process, but it's their methods, from what I've managed to see, that tend to lose me more than anything else. I know a lot of people would have preferred a group that would handle situations in a more humane manner. It's not an easy problem nor solution by any means.
Thank you for the opportunity to give your opinion.
I don't look favorably on copying text content. Even if citing a source, if in my judgment the author's intention is to modify parts of the text to avoid plagiarism, the content should not be supported or encouraged by the community.
I see an organic community with a very important function, expressed in the ideas of its foundation. an adjustment in the curation and rewards policy seems necessary to me.
Definitely appreciate your input and opinion on this important matter!
The first question: should we allow the aforementioned content (copied content with sources) to be posted in the FreeCompliments Community?
In my opinion, this is the most challenging question. I've participated in lots of debates over the years about what is actually censorship and what is not. The answer to this is critical in order to gauge how censorship-resistant a platform really is.
I personally try to take the most permissive stance possible, with some caveats. If something is illegal in most of the world, it should not be permitted. (Whereas something illegal only some places could be important to encourage!) If allowing certain content would bring harm to your community, then it's a question of whether providing a forum for that content is morally important enough to make it worth the risk of harm. The answer to this might be yes, especially if the community is strong and can withstand the harm. If the community is not a position to withstand the harm, then the answer is probably no. I'm not active enough in the community to judge the answer to this.
In my business, I have to take a firmer stance, because Hive SBI is a tool more than a community, and not in a position to protect members from all potential attacks. It's better to cave on edge cases than to allow all members to be harmed by the negative attention brought by a few. That might change as we grow bigger (and less vulnerable), but we still have to be careful.
Thanks, this is a very practical way to view the situation!
We'll ultimately see what the community thinks about this one.
This is probably the most difficult of the questions to answer because what makes a good post for one person may not be a good post for another. Whenever I post, I constantly have running, in the back of my head, 'Will this add value to whoever reads it?'As such, I go to great efforts to try and produce content that is original and will be beneficial to anyone who reads it, and in my case, educate people on a condition they may not have heard of before.
In my short time on this platform, I've read numerous articles by people who clearly think the same, and I've also opened posts that are a couple of words and three or four links to external sites, and have closed them immediately. Not to say that content isn't valuable - it just doesn't interest me. There are plenty of other places I can go to click on links.
That being said, my answer to this question is a reluctant yes. I don't like the idea of people being excluded or marginalised because of what they believe and that means giving the benefit of the doubt that when someone presses that 'Publish' button, they are contributing something they deem to be of value.
Agreed, despite the fact that I am fighting for them, on a personal level I also am not fond of those types of posts that offer very little content and are unoriginal. In fact, I'm hoping that my own content is reflective of the type of quality that I would prefer to contribute to the blockchain (at a minimum!). Nevertheless, I don't believe in the suppression of any type of content.
Now, when we're giving the benefit of the doubt of a valuable contribution, I think that in the case of a monetized platform, that may be a little bit generous of a presumption. I have no doubt that a lot of people who currently post here would not be doing so if not for the monetary rewards - and that's completely understandable! It is designed to have a financial incentive.
However, the realization that outstanding original work and interaction with people is what would lead to long-term success on the platform... well, that alone should be incentive to contribute quality work. And I did hope that my reward structure would help proliferate quality work. Fortunately, we seem to have a good mixture every month! Our quality posters ultimately get nice rewards, hopefully at least in proportion to their effort.
Only short reference, like if someone else is in a Bad moment i should be abble to take 50 Words of him copy/paste and response him with 200 Words, know what i mean? Like this way some of us can make reference to old post, like me for example a year ago events i can take it back when loading this year vids ( just a example) so in that case is hard decisión or Flexible límit about cooy/paste case man.
⚠️
yes
Hey, good morning. I believe that the path to understanding is through DIALOGUE. Therefore, I thank you for the opportunity to talk about the topic, also for listening to the community, and finally the community for taking their time to share your opinion.
The role of Hive Members is to ensure that the Reward Pool is not used by people with bad intentions. Imagine, if we didn't have Hive's "Good Neighboor Policies", we would have lots and lots of bots using AI to share content 24 hours a day and drying the pool. Furthermore, if we left 100% copy of content, we would have people posting content from other users on other platforms all day long.
So, my opinion is that all content needs to have a purpose, share an idea, with something UNIQUE, like an opinion. That's why I believe that the posts need some originality. Now regarding the votes, I believe that it is something personal and you can vote for whoever you want, but at the same time, I think that valuing creative and original posts, in which there is added effort, is the best way to use your votes, because as some said one day the pool will cease to exist and only you'll need to trully like to post to reward it.
Appreciate you sharing your thoughts! Indeed, incentivizing originality of content is essential.
However, a lot of social media does exactly what you're describing: sharing copied stuff from elsewhere 24/7. It's very common on popular websites like Facebook, X, Reddit, etc., and frankly it's a good formula for success as it's easier for people to interact with and digest. A lot of that content does have its uses, hence why the sites are so popular, so I do think it has greater value than we may attribute here on Hive.
I also think that with microblogging (Threads, Decks, etc.), we're gradually transitioning into more of this type of content, although microblogging also has plenty of opportunities for originality.
Now, should it be rewarded the same way as original content? I don't think so, and people have made great points as to why it may not warrant rewards at all, yourself included (imagine AI bots collecting tons of rewards just for reposting indefinitely!).
It'll be interesting to see where we end up in a few years. We're entering quite a crossroads!
Yeah let's see what happens. Like some people said we may see a big change with Inleo Threads and stuff, something layer 2.
Yes, I was also thinking of having Layer 2 as a possible solution!
I'll definitely be making a follow-up post to this one once the voting period expires (assuming it doesn't cut into the monthly contests, rewards, etc.).
That's the magic of talking about it. We all can come up with ideas.
Yay! 🤗
Your content has been boosted with Ecency Points, by @freecompliments.
Use Ecency daily to boost your growth on platform!
Support Ecency
Vote for new Proposal
Delegate HP and earn more
Hello, good evening, first of all, thank you very much for the opportunity to express my opinion on this subject.
My view of Hive is that this type of content should not be supported, I believe that the effort and merit in receiving what you deserve and for originality should always be taken into account. Using some references, but still having the majority of your text be original, with the author writing is the best thing we can encourage.
I believe that the virtual rules (virtual because theoretically the hive has no rules, but it has good customs to guide us) that we must follow, are to avoid at all costs and not support plagiarism, spinning, content created entirely by AI, content with little effort, homophobic or racist attacks, voting schemes, among others.
I think this is the best way to have an active and organic community, truly rewarding those who make the most effort to deliver incredible and original content.
Appreciate your thoughts on this! Just to clarify, since I did try to make the distinction: would you be in support of allowing that type of copy-pasted content to be posted at all, as long as it's not rewarded/curated? As in... breaking these virtual rules would result only in lack of rewards. I'm definitely clear on the curation aspect, haha. 😁
It's a great point you've raised, I think what happens most across Hive leads us to two points:
Should the community ban these types of posts at all costs? You could put that as a clear rule, then that ban could be downvotes or silencing both the author with the curation profile, and silencing in the community. That way, people would be discouraged from making such posts.
The other point is that you want to see what all the authors have to offer, even if it's something plagiarized or copied and with references, like the case that started it all. You then say fine, you can post whatever you want in my community, but you won't get a vote from the healing account and other members will be discouraged from voting for you.
I see these two points, as we can't ban anyone from a certain community, I think it's impossible to control what the person will want to post or not, so what can be done is to put as rules that this type of post will not be accepted and if the author posts, simply skip it.
Hello freecompliments!
It's nice to let you know that your article will take 4th place.
Your post is among 15 Best articles voted 7 days ago by the @hive-lu | King Lucoin Curator by keithtaylor
You receive 🎖 2.2 unique LUBEST tokens as a reward. You can support Lu world and your curator, then he and you will receive 10x more of the winning token. There is a buyout offer waiting for him on the stock exchange. All you need to do is reblog Daily Report 131 with your winnings.
Buy Lu on the Hive-Engine exchange | World of Lu created by szejq
STOPor to resume write a wordSTARTAssuming the question is about copy/paste posts made without sufficienf additional original content being made to add value, then
The second question: if we allow this content within the community, should we curate it (with minimal votes from our curation account and curation trail)?
As easy as a black and white answer would be here, I wonder whether it's more complex than that. Not curating posts would be akin to telling people that they're not worth anything, but to curate posts of minimal effort is to reward, and thus promote, posts that are likely thrown together in a rush and then published carelessly.
Having said that, I don't think a post that is 100% copied and pasted, regardless of referencing, should be rewarded. Despite the fact that references are an admission that the work is not that of the post author, if they copied and pasted, they didn't really do anything worth recognising. It doesn't seem fair to people who go to painstaking lengths to create original content. Perhaps just a positive comment acknowledging the post would be more appropriate?
Given that this is the FreeCompliments Community, that's actually a very clever and appropriate solution! It would be exactly in line with our mission. This is why I love gathering people's various ideas. Love this.
I would recommend against this. Hivewatchers and others have lots of screening that surfaces content that they don't like that has rewards on it. The more often your community shows up in their screens, the more likely they are to decide the community itself is a blight and take a harder stance against things they might otherwise ignore.
That's also a very good point to consider, so thank you for writing this directly under this question! I expect that people will be able to see it.
That's worth a second consideration.
Yes
The third question: if we curate the content, should we allow Hivewatchers to cancel out our votes?
I'm not sure how you would prevent this, aside from creating your own token that they don't hold (token rewards instead of HIVE rewards).
I was definitely considering 2nd layer options. However, I would hope that if the community chooses "no" to this question, that Hivewatchers would respect the decision. I'll tag them when the voting period ends.
I think communities can effectively be self-governing, especially when they become larger, so we'll see what happens!
By the way, please do feel free to place your own vote here! I know that you wrote it out prior, but it'll help me for accounting purposes. 😉
What is the meaning of this curator account if the hive watcher is the one who decide who should be curated or not. Or in another hand it will be good because we have different knowledge and it most accurate to have decide by two brains not by one
I think of it like this... all of Hive is a broad community, with an ongoing consensus mechanism about what should be rewarded, and by how much. Most of the time content is middling to good, and attracts positive votes. Since nobody has strong objections, those votes carry and distribute a portion of the total rewards. The stake behind each vote is a weighting mechanism to balance all the relative reward value everything receives in each ongoing cycle.
Sometimes there are strong objections to something being rewarded, and downvotes appear. If there is strong consensus that the downvoter is wrong, the community can rally together to cancel out the downvotes, or apply moral suasion or other pressure to the downvoter to get them to withdraw. (This is basically what happened when Hive SBI itself was targeted a few years ago. The community rallied together and a powerful whale took notice and pressured the attackers to back off, even though they were not otherwise supportive of us.)
If there is no consensus that the downvoter is wrong, then the downvoter has an edge because their votes are less 'expensive' than upvotes.
While this community might vote to continue rewarding this content, hivewatchers will counter that you're only a small part of a larger community, and the consensus in the larger community is to support them in their anti-abuse efforts. It is unlikely they will respect your community's decision and back off if you vote to continue supporting what they call 'copy-pasta'.
This is definitely my expectation. However, I wanted to give the community an opportunity to express their thoughts and then to communicate the outcome with hivewatchers. The worst outcome is the expected one, so I believe there's nothing to lose with this community vote. I don't think I'd be doing my due diligence if I didn't give it a try.
Agreed, and that's the problem we're dealing with, unfortunately... hivewatcher's downvote trail's stake is strong enough to cancel out a lot of others' votes. That's why I'm technically against this.
I am a big supporter of having multiple opinions, but the stake itself becomes powerful enough where a single vote can cancel out all opposition, and that's not really an ideal outcome.
Happen to me once... Doesnt feels good. Not on this community btw just saying, they have a huge downvote trail can get a decent value post to 0.
Rules are rules but some of them should be in the pass because we need to be a little more free on here, and to be free everyone should have a little control on what they want to SEE/VOTE lets be honest, in My case, who tf want to SEE Graffiti on a blockchain...
Community should have a free hand to decide too.
No