Think it’s clear that hive is controlled by those with the highest stake and maybe what you show here is a form of gaming the system/rewards pool. I’ve not enough knowledge or understanding to say either way. Personally I’ve nothing against those who’ve invested heavily having a bigger say than someone like me but recently there’s been a lot of hypocrisy and disingenuous reasoning. Be nice to see some honesty instead of pretending it’s fair and decentralised.
Hive is ran by people and people are inherently flawed by greed and ego, therefore it will never be perfect.
Found it quite amusing to read a post bemoaning how the author had been pestered by a down voter for reasons of revenge. Strangely, this particular author avoided all the usual verbal abuse and downvotes from the usually outspoken whales, folk who quite often say they will downvote “any” post that moans about this subject. Ironically, this post was massively over rewarded (IMO).
One rule for you, one rule for their mates.
Speaking of which, I just noticed this today: https://hive.blog/hive-167922/@tarazkp/funkers-and-funders
The interesting part is that @kennyskitchen, the great champion against downvoting, seems to be the one that downvoted the post (presumably for criticizing his behavior). The part that is probably not obvious is that the huge downvote is from tribesteemup, but it is an account he controls.
Well I could point this out as well:
But doing that certainly won't help get me unmuted around here so I better just keep it to myself and not make a scene. I mean, why should I mention how those comments weren't under his post, I wasn't talking to him, and none were even set to earn. Where will that get me? Nowhere.
Why would I ever un-mute you?
So when you talk to me, you don't have to click that annoying reveal button. It's a huge time saver. Plus then it's not like opening a mystery box. But sometimes, presents are nice.
Also, when you mute someone, all you're doing is making everyone even more curious, so they click to see what was said. In other words, if it's your goal to silence me, you'd be better off not muting me.
I don't hold any of this against you though. I just think it's funny. If I frustrate you, well, shit. Nothing I can do about that. I'm a bit rough around the edges or whatever. It's not unusual for people to not like me, at first. Someday dude, we're gonna be BFF! Isn't this exciting!
I can only control my own actions, nobody else's. I’ve said this before, that this all needs to stop as it’s like a playground argument. If everyone would just stick to downvotes being used to control plagiarism and fraud there wouldn’t be a problem. Instead we now have a ridiculous flag war and petty name calling. As for me, I’ve read many comments from people on both sides. Acidyo raised some good points which actually made me reflect on what I bring to the table as an author. Is my content original? Am I just parroting what’s already out there? Quite valid points that I have to agree with to some extent. Unfortunately the only other person I’ve spoken to and asked for reasoning came back with absolute arrogance and a huge amount of ego. There is a circle jerk amongst many hive profiles that appear on the trending page, that’s quite indisputable. Saying that, is there really anything wrong with constantly upvoting your friends without assessing the content of there post? I’d say the answer is no, unless you're downvoting others for the content of their posts.
I’m very aware and appreciative of what hive offers to me but that doesn’t mean I have to be a good little boy and remain silent when there is obviously bullying going on. It’s obvious people on here don’t agree on covid, conspiracy theories, vaccinations etc etc, but that doesn’t mean one is right and one is wrong, absolutely. At that point there should be debate in the comments section, not downvotes. Downvotes should be for the reasons we all believed they were intended for. If not we end up back in the playground.
Who are the people in the 'circle jerk'?
I’m not getting into naming individuals. Go check out the trending page and you’ll see plenty of posts that have massive rewards for very little effort or imagination. Like I said, I’ve nothing against circle jerks, it’s natural to want to support your friends. I just find it hypocritical when people bemoan others getting over rewarded.
'Social Circles' would be a natural occurrence on a 'Social Network', yes. The over rewarded concept confuses me at times as well. And I can agree sometimes it appears very little effort is being rewarded heavily. In a sense, those posts you're mentioning indirectly would be the over rewarded content. But then someone else might look and want to add more. With so many minds involved, I try to not letter bother my mind.
I didn't mean to put you on the spot. In the early days on Steem there was a prominent 'circle jerk' sticking out like a sore thumb. When I look at trending these days, I see a variety of support circles pushing a variety of content up. Compared to the old days, I'd say it's a least a little more organic these days.
“Social circle”, I like that turn of phrase and it’s more appropriate. The whole issue with over rewarded posts is something that I try not to focus on or get involved in. It’s a positive problem to have and I do agree with you completely when you talk about many minds. For me, it’s the negative edge of this sword which bothers me. The ones in a position to offer such great rewards do so as they see fit and that’s great for those in receipt. Sometimes I think these votes are deserved and sometimes I don’t, but I’d never downvote a post because it wasn’t to my personal liking. Who am I to cancel out other peoples opinions/votes? And if it’s a post about a subject I strongly disagree with then I’ll leave a comment.
Sadly, we seem to have come to a point where certain people are abusing the power they have. They now make the decision on whether a certain subject or author is to be rewarded, solely based on their own opinion or ideology and that really stinks. Fuck! have an argument. Call someone a cunt if you really disagree, just don’t cancel out the authors supporters. They have every right to support whatever post they like and see that author rewarded. My point is that it’s one persons opinion against another’s and both sides have the right to voice those opinion. Things cross the line when one persons opinion has the power to cancel out those who support that author and remove the rewards they saw fit to offer.
By far the worst effect of all this is that good authors who post interesting content(IMO) now spend their time writing about being downvoted.
Anyway, I think I’m beginning to ramble on so I’ll leave it there.
My work is mainly entertainment based. I'd hope people support it only because they like it, or me, because that's how this business works. Art and jokes at times can be confusing for some. It would be incredibly awkward to get downvoted because someone didn't get a joke, for instance. That's more on them, than me. An artist knows in advance, whatever is created then put on display, the people who won't like it or take no interest at all far outnumber those who will. I've had a good run here. The people are awesome and I adore many. The only flak I've received comes from folks who only looked at the rewards. Then judge me for something I had nothing to do with. Set the goal to do well and create something people might enjoy, but there's no way of knowing in advance if they will or not. For instance when writing humor, you don't truly know is something is actually funny, until you get the reaction. So you either entertain, or completely bomb and feel humiliated. Yet do it all again...
Content of political nature, by design, is meant to impress half and piss off the other half. Then once one half is totally pissed, then they sit around being pissed off all the time, feeding off one another. Spirals downwards. By design. People fight.
I've been downvoted heavily before. Wrote a couple posts on the topic and happenings. The outcome was typically quite civil. No real fighting. No dwelling. No blaming everything and everyone. No demands. No constant barrage of posts insulting anyone. The one who was downvoting me (big downvotes) actually came along, left me a joke, and the downvoting stopped on the same day.
So yeah lately I've been seeing a lot of sensationalism, gaslighting, finger pointing, arguments etc. A lot division created, enforced and maintained. A post like this above I see as just a big show; a spectacle. It doesn't exist to actually solve the problems.
There's a lot of people out there having fun as well. They far outnumber those experiencing drama and maintaining it. Those mixed up with the drama don't really know about that world, out there. That's natural for social circles though. People become products of their environment. I personally like to be involved or at least informed so I'm all over the place silently observing or offering my two cents. I just wonder where this crowd was back in the day when what's presented above was discussed, explained, argued, and so on. But again, that's a natural effect of social circles. People keep to themselves but suddenly there's a problem so they step outside their comfort zone only to discover an incredibly confusing new world.
Oh shit. I'm rambling too.
Yes, I did down-vote that libelous post.
If you "whales" get to zero out every post you don't like, I certainly get to throw a downvote (not nearly zero-ing) on a massively over-rewarded piece full of lies about me.
It's hilarious that the only thing any of you can try to hold against me is when I do things similar to what y'all are doing, but on a much smaller scale.
I don't have a problem with the concept of downvoting, especially against spam, libel, plagiarism, not-labeled-NSFW posts, etc.
I run tribesteemup, everyone knows that. It has been 100% transparent literally the whole time that the account has existed. Nice try though.
Are you silly enough to think that every random Hive user knows that you operate the tribesteemup account? You have a seriously inflated sense of your own importance. For example, I've operated the alpha account as my personal account for years, but plenty of people don't know that, despite me being very public about it.
No, but it's obvious to everyone who is familiar with either account, and by a quick glance at the @tribesteemup account.
No, you're just trying to act like I was being "sneaky" about something.
I didn't know that - so you're blocktrades, @blocktrades.com, and @alpha huh?
No, I was simply providing enough info to the person I was responding to so that they would understand my point. Odds are strong they didn't know you owned that account, in which case my comment would have just confused them.
That's exactly why I'm bringing it to light, so it can be discussed, debated, explained, and even if nothing changes, at least a lot more people will know what's going on.
This is exactly the reason I keep making posts to shine light on various parts of this. I don't have a problem with a system designed around stake-is-all being run by the handful of folks who hold most of the stake... but stop pretending like 20 witnesses, held in place by 10 voters, is somehow "decentralized."
Very true; and one of the things that really got me hooked originally was the way that @dan talked about creating systems to better incentivize positive behavior, to disincentivize harmful behavior, etc. Since we know who will be playing the game (humans), it makes sense to design accordingly, so we don't end up with another system that rewards those who act like psychopaths, even if they're not.
Ya, I was waiting for @smooth to come in and zero that post out, since he has a zero tolerance policy for posts discussing down-votes getting rewarded...
Same reason every politician only wears a mask when they're on camera.
I don't think I saw it.