You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: About the Whole Self-Upvoting Debate-- Let's Examine the BIGGER Perspective!

in #steemit7 years ago

What's a "Social Content Platform"?

I kept that pretty ambiguous for a couple of reasons-- one being that Steemit's self-definition seems incredibly vague, the other being that it allows for a lot of inclusiveness. I really have no idea what this place is. Or wants to be. People make references to Reddit, but IMNSHO that's sucky thing to aspire to... it's mostly a snakepit of petty politicking, pseudo intellectual mental masturbation and dictatorial sub-redditors with huge egos.

Short-sightedness is the death blow to many things... around here, I see far too many people getting wrapped up in the price of Steem tomorrow, while remaining blatantly unaware of the greater picture and meta trends that create long term growth and stability. As someone else here pointed out, you'd think that some of the early adopters would have more interest in planning how their current $1M stakes could grow by 10x or even 100x by 2025 so they can have their freedom on the beach in Mexico... but of course that requires a "common good" mindset... and that's very communist thing of me to say! :P

Don't know if you saw @bmj's proposal for weighting self-upvoting in such a way it simply burns through your voting power much faster-- seems quite worthwhile. No dreaded "censorship" of self-upvoting, merely adjusting the code to disincentivize the practice. https://steemit.com/steem/@bmj/proposed-hf-changes-to-bring-voting-back-in-line-with-its-intended-purpose-rewarding-quality

Sort:  

it's mostly a snakepit of petty politicking, pseudo intellectual mental masturbation and dictatorial sub-redditors with huge egos.

Some mega whales advocates for flagging content they don't like that gets too popular and rewarded too much to their liking. They want to be the dictators of who can or can't keep their rewards just because they don't like the content getting popular, or don't like the person, etc.

Jumping into decentralized social interaction without a plan makes for an omnidirectional mess hehe. If Steemit Inc had set something to being with, at least there would be a set goal to work with for starters. We can't seem to even start one lol.

Yeah well... it's really hard for many people to rise above their own shit long enough to realize that if the want their own shit to float, they need to (somewhat selflessly) take care of the "pond" that makes it possible for their shit to float, in the first place. But that somehow seems to be rocket science...

I've long been wailing at the moon about the weakness (or "Achilles Heel") of decentralization (a good idea, in principle) being "fragmentation." Or, as you put it rather well "an omnidirectional mess." Maybe it makes me a heinous traitor to the cause to say so, but not all aspects of centralized structures are inherently "evil."

The thing is on the blockchain, you cant have centralized power, it violates the whole trustless tech aspect. I had the idea of splitting into two ledgers, one as a real ledger for financial transactions, and the other chain for data/info. I have lots of ideas on how things would be better, making another blockchain, possible even a deployable package for people to tokenize their own sites and run it like that.