I don't know what happened here and I don't agree with many of the decisions made to put people on the blacklists - I know of one pretty big youtuber who dumped steem as a result of being put on the blacklist unfairly and being unable to get removed. However, I have had comments from joe.public on yt accusing all kinds of things that just aren't accurate and so I am guessing him being on the list is something to do with that. I don't personally think that anyone should be blacklisted because of their opinions or even due to them outright lying (unless they clearly intend to scam). I also am not really comfortable with the existence of centralised blacklists at all. Some kind of management and arbitration system is needed on the blockchain level, yes.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
As I said, he's been less than tactful.
However, my understanding of the #irredeemables list is that a dispute arose between Bernie and @fulltimegeek, which Marty inflamed by sending a refund due @fulltimegeek to @null, and Bernie and @fulltimegeek began a spam war which ended up with @fulltimegeek on the newly created #irredeemables list, and Bernie walking away after spamming tens of thousands of pics of poop in a toilet. Now @joe.public is on the list for replying to Bernie's later spam, again Bernie walks away.
As a witness, you might take note of Bernie's obvious financial power over Hive. That may be key to your rankings.
Either the community votes on deploying censorship via the API level #irredeemables list mechanism, or it remains the fiefdom of Bernie's minion @themarkymark, apparently satisfactorily loyal to Bernie to be allowed to wield the sole option to censor anyone on Hive at will.
I was already aware of about 3/4 of that. I am well aware of Bernie's nature, though that was on STEEM - he claims to have changed direction for Hive. Ultimately there isn't anything I can do directly unless I am in the top 20 and even then it is limited. @dan manually set bernie's rep to minus figures years ago but then the community decided to upvote him again to bring it back. I honestly have little clue as to what motivates voting in the top 20, but in all but a few cases it doesn't seem that the voters are demonstrating business knowledge or social/PR awareness.
I have been here nearly three years now, and yet continue to grasp aspects of the political machinations behind the scenes too long and well obscured.
All I seek presently regarding this issue is to present HPS proposals to subject people to censorship, rather than allowing it to be solely the power of one individual. Either the community controls the power, or the community is controlled by it.
Thanks!
The bottom line is that as long as the system is controlled by those with the most wealth, their minions will mostly call the shots. As long as society allocates resources in relation to wealth, this situation is likely to continue.
A solid and well specified design for an improved management system for these parts of the blockchain could result in a voted worker proposal and a Hard Fork - however, it still relies on developer acceptance and witness acceptance - so they would have to be consulted. I don't even know who most of them are at this point!
With steem the problem was that their development happened in a 'black box' environment, following their own private agenda. So far I don't see any difference in the way hive is operating, but I willing to give the situation a degree of time to demonstrate change.
I also don't see any difference between governance on Hive and how it was undertaken prior to Hive.
I would note that enabling control of #irredeemables list to be taken by community voting via HPS requires no HF, or coding at all I am aware of. The implementation of the list is what takes code, not control of the inclusions on the list, which is undertaken on Github, not the blockchain.
Clearly such centralized codebase precludes actual decentralization, but in this case controlling the #irredeemables list through HPS rather than @themarkymark personally doing so requires no HF. I don't think he personally has been hardcoded into the code the consensus is running for that purpose.
I have not elected to go along with anyone.
In searching to find comments by @joe.public I need to respond to on his profile, since I don't see them, I found this:
Which I believe is a response to your above comment. It's hard to tell. Might apply to me too.
that was a reply to one of my comments, were you not able to click a parent link to see the thread it was part of?
When I clicked the parent link, the comment I replied to was that parent, which is why I posted it there. As soon as you click the parent, the child vanishes, so it can be confusing. I believe that was the comment it was in response to.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Stupid ass shit like this is exactly why you're on those lists.
Retard will act retarded.
Providing the evidence you asked for on youtube will take some time because there is hours of material involved and I currently have to deal with being locked down in Britain and the absurdity that all of that involves.
In the context of this discussion about blacklisting, as I said - I was guessing - so I am not wrong here.
I will look at any URLs provided to understand the issue here, but I don't have time to dig around 1000s of posts trying to find them. Numerous people have researched into both Haeijin and bernie but I have not seen any conclusive proof of their identities as yet.