Do you think I was harassing a user when I asked them to make a reply on their other social media account like the case mentioned above? The guy clearly faked their profile and it only took me soem conversation off platform to see if they got hive written or know about it. @jeffjagoe disagrees as in his world there's no need for ways to verify users even in decentralized platforms. He gave his private info on centralized platforms freely so why does it become an issue if done on decentralized where you only need to put the word Hive as a requirement?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The harassment I am talking about involves:
The cookie cut #HW's comments including accusations such as "scammer", "plagerist", etc.
Requiring people to join Discord, for off-chain verifcation.
Requiring people to post an apology on their HIVE Profile.
Posted via Blog | D.Buzz
Yeah mostly that beef you got up is with HW and not necessarily my own case where I just want to see if the one I'm voting at is real or not. I agree that some areas need to be worked out. Still can't believe that some just can't be bothered to respond cross platform over a trivial task such as confirming if they own the account or not.
What you're doing isn't really bad, since you seem to be talking civilly.
But until there is a verification system, that's more seamless, no choice
Posted via Blog | D.Buzz
So my complaints are not really toward you, but more toward the #HW's system, of doing the three things I mentioned in my prior reply.
Posted via Blog | D.BuzzLarge influencers who have 1 million users+ will not appreciate users from #HIVE telling them to manually verify their identity.
So my complaints are not really toward you, but more toward the #HW's system, of doing the three things I mentioned in my prior reply.
Posted via Blog | D.BuzzLarge influencers who have 1 million users+ will not appreciate users from #HIVE telling them to manually verify their identity.
I get the part where HW has bad PR when it comes to verifications. Not going to argue there. The argument was do we need verifications or not? It doesn't matter whether they post cross platform, I just want to know if the person I am voting for is the same person on the other side reposting content. For those users who refused to opt in, would that mean they get less votes? Nah, they would still get curated by unsuspecting users as it happens and will be common when the platform gets further growth. @eloy-drawing refused further communications when they knew I was contacting the real one on instagram. The eloy case is a classic user that steals content from an unsuspecting creator. They would less likely try to opt in for verification but still get rogue votes while they continue their streak.
There is a need for an opt-in verification system:
To match the opt-in verification system, #Hive should follow-up w/a culture of rewarding verified accounts over non-verified accounts.
Non-verified accounts could still get votes, but it would likely be from low-stakes.
Posted via Blog | D.Buzz
Yeah I made a reply on the subject just now on another comment. In an ideal hive, users would be more responsible using their stake to upvote, make decisions on governance, and etc but that's far from what we got as far as decentralization goes. You see users do commit plagiarism yet there is a steep hill to get people use the downvote button even when it is grossly stolen and proven. Also the Pressure of rewarding verified accounts would also mean anons who just prefer to be anons who prefer to be anons with no other social media presence somewhere gets left out in the equation. The system relies on connecting ones name with other platforms am I right?
Yes, but on an opt-in basis.
You are most concerned with the rewards going to the correct parties, based on your terms.
I am more concerned with increase @dbuzz and #HIVE's proven use-case as a #FreeSpeech platform.
#1 should not be done at the expense of #2.
Posted via D.Buzz
Yes.
Do you think being downvoted is an attempt to silence free speech on the blockchain? Given there are ways to retrieve what is written once posted or a frontend made to ignore the reputation system in place? Do you think being downvoted is a form of crime against free speech? Do you think an upvote is a form of free speech? do you think a downvote is a form of free speech? If I make a post about how @jeffjagoe could not extricate his feet from his mouth and the guy downvotes that post, would he also be against my free speech?
Nah man, it's always been about the rewards people cry about here. Anyone can talk shit about something or someone and get likes (upvotes) but it's like alien to know ideas, people and somethings can also be disliked (downvoted).
Going back to the case of @eloy-drawing who is a confirmed fake content creator. There's a steemit account version that still able to monetize the stolen works and no one would give a fuck on that place to downvote or even learn about the faker. This means opportunity costs taken away from the real content creator without them even knowing it. Am I being an oppressor of free speech if I keep on downvoting the faker here? nope, I just take away the rewards. I don't have control whether they want to still post shit on the account.
People have always been free to post whatever they like here just as they are free to upvote or downvote whoever they like as part of their freedom of expression for like and discontent for the content. Drama happens when they think that freedom bears no consequences like I don't know, being deluded that there can be actual people that can dislike the content and disagree with the rewards?
Now if this was facebook, that's a different story as whatever I say can be deleted out of my control if the admins don't like it. But it isn't. You can't delete my posts. No one else can. It's the blockchain and people are crying for the rewards lost, not the loss of free speech.
Nobody mentioned anything about taking rewards from posters/impostors (plagiarists using posts from real accounts on other platforms to earn from them) at the expense of free speech. 🤨😑
I did, and thats because it happens.
And have not properly compared the levels of freedom to post on Web2 vs. $HIVE
Posted via D.Buzz
@snacky,
Can you chime in and share some of your ideas with @adamada and maybe backread the thread?
Posted via D.BuzzYou are much better at explaining than I am @snacky, especially when you compared the rewards people receive to other blockchains.
Creators already have an impersonator problem; that has nothing to do with hive. They solve this by linking/mentioning their official accounts in their content, and this is the best solution both for them and for the internet in general. It's simple, low-tech and has few problems. Cultivating /educating this as the thing to do rather than websites babysitting people will actually solve the problem webwide, savvier users will be less likely to be tricked. Giving users the expectation that sites are here to take care of you will make things easier for scammers/impersonators.
That having been said I think a keybase-style verifier bot would be quite good if done in that way, keybase just gives links back to other accounts it's verified in the user profile, and does not elevate or "blue check" the user above other users in any way.
Perhaps this is a different issue, but by the way:
Entertaining notions of "if people don't step up and do X, the blockchain will fail" is an indication of an already failed experiment. If your blockchain relies on users to take voluntary generous action and the overhead and incentive to take that action aren't enough to get it to happen naturally such that you have to encourage it, the system is broken & time to abandon. I hardly think not enough downvoting is a system critical issue though
Thanks for the comprehensive reply
A verification requirements to add those accounts = Solution (no check)
Posted via D.Buzz@savvyplayer @steevc @amamada @jeffjagoe @frankbacon
💯
Well said.
Thanks for the tag @chrisrice
otheror who want to make a separate identity than those they made on their accounts on other platforms? 🤨As what I mentioned at https://peakd.com/@savvyplayer/re-chrisrice-202166t11253822z, what about Hive users who don't have any account in any social media platform like @adamada said,
I added my solution in a prior reply.
Then curators could decide for themselves, if the evidence was acceptable or not.
Posted via D.Buzz
You would actually be doing a favor to those "large influencers" if you let them know that there is a plagiarist (on Hive or somewhere else) who steals their content and profit off them at the owners' expense. 🤨😑
Sure, but that is the extreme case:
There are in fact, legit authors, accused of being plagerists, when they were not
Some of those autbors only got help when influential accounts intervened
There is a list if plagerism types, and almost all speech can fit inside it
Posted via D.Buzz
The harassment would come when users refuses to verify their account, but is then pressured, bad mouthed, etc.
But I understand that you don't have better tools yet.
Posted via Blog | D.BuzzIf you backread, I'm planning on creating a verification tool for @dbuzz but have to add other thing 1st.