As mentioned above, I see enough potential here to increase the freedom of expression for all sorts of people.
I think I can have more impact, if I don't fight against windmills. My main mission is to support weaker accounts in building their own hive power and reach and not by opposing other people.
I have downvoted ocd for a while, confronted acidyo on chain and pharesim in private, but that's a about as much as I see beneficial for what I am trying to achieve.
When the weaker accounts are crushed routinely, with no way to respond then there is only so much help that can be provided without addressing the cause of their issue. Sure, accounts that post unchallenging content may not have such problems, but then what is the point in saying we support freedom of expression if the caveat is that the expression has to conform to a few people's opinions? lol.
If you provide some links to your downvotes and discussions with these folks then I'll definitely take a look. Thanks.
I don't think it's worth it, as I am not who you are looking for anyways.
Maybe if I find the time, I'll write a script for finding those downvotes and discussions, as some of that stuff is old... and I want to show proof, just for the record.
Thanks, there are some interesting statements made in that thread - in particular that they value commenting and engagement over the quality of the actual post. So they are not curating for POB, but POC (proof of commenting) - which is not really a valid metric for POB. If commenting were a sound measure of POB then commenting would be a factor in the reward algorithm. So at the very least it is reasonable to say that all investors and creators need to be aware that the 'code is law' selling point of POB and Hive is being distorted by the POC approach of the major curating projects at present.
Anyone can take action now to become such a candidate! :)
As mentioned above, I see enough potential here to increase the freedom of expression for all sorts of people.
I think I can have more impact, if I don't fight against windmills. My main mission is to support weaker accounts in building their own hive power and reach and not by opposing other people.
I have downvoted ocd for a while, confronted acidyo on chain and pharesim in private, but that's a about as much as I see beneficial for what I am trying to achieve.
When the weaker accounts are crushed routinely, with no way to respond then there is only so much help that can be provided without addressing the cause of their issue. Sure, accounts that post unchallenging content may not have such problems, but then what is the point in saying we support freedom of expression if the caveat is that the expression has to conform to a few people's opinions? lol.
If you provide some links to your downvotes and discussions with these folks then I'll definitely take a look. Thanks.
Phew, that would take me a while.
I don't think it's worth it, as I am not who you are looking for anyways.
Maybe if I find the time, I'll write a script for finding those downvotes and discussions, as some of that stuff is old... and I want to show proof, just for the record.
Oh ok, I didn't realise you meant that the posts were so old.
I made this post recently:
https://peakd.com/ocd/@felixxx/hive-blockchain-vs-curation-business
In the comments you can see how crazy acidyo is.
And that we go way back.
However, that was not about free speech, but more about how they influence content and its rewards here.
Thanks, there are some interesting statements made in that thread - in particular that they value commenting and engagement over the quality of the actual post. So they are not curating for POB, but POC (proof of commenting) - which is not really a valid metric for POB. If commenting were a sound measure of POB then commenting would be a factor in the reward algorithm. So at the very least it is reasonable to say that all investors and creators need to be aware that the 'code is law' selling point of POB and Hive is being distorted by the POC approach of the major curating projects at present.