As I said when I heard the other week. Finally! Then the complaints about second-layer tokens not having value started.
As I have said many, many times - Not earning Hive as reward has nothing to do with censorship. All the information is there - you just have to build for it, rather than expect others to do it for you.
I have explained many times, but you may not have read my words. The dictionary definition of 'censor' as a verb includes:
source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censor
The definition of Suppress includes:
source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suppress
The purpose of downvotes in the context of the reward pool is to inhibit the growth of the post (and the account that made the post) - ergo, downvoting is suppression, by design.
If you object to content based on it's message rather than because it violates legal rules on copyright or other such reasons, and you downvote it, then according to dictionary definitions in English, you are participating in censorship. Many people don't pay attention to the etymology of language and so often don't appreciate the full meaning of the words they are using. This often results in pointless arguments that last years because people don't realise they are talking about different things.
When downvoting happens for ideological reasons, the growth of the account involved is limited in terms of reach and economic ability to grow in terms of content creation and production quality. Hive currently allows people to downvote to make that happen and I am just pointing out that according to the meaning of the word 'censorship', this activity is censorship. I am also pointing out that from a PR and marketing perspective, this activity hurts Hive .
People generally want valuable content generation, which includes intelligent debate and engagement when people disagree on important topics. The irony of certain individuals downvoting without comment or engagement and then even having the audacity to say they are downvoting due to a lack of engagement from other people is not lost on large numbers of observers who may not comment publicly for their own reasons.
Very well stated.
thanks!
It doesn't suppress what is said, it suppresses the HIVE allocated to it. Two different things.
Just like eating and drinking, those seemingly separate events are inextricably linked in the human person experiencing them, and not reckoning this - or intentionally using it to drive creators odious to whales from the platform - has strongly affected the growth of Hive and the value of it's token.
None could know better than you that creating content has a cost, and null or negative rewards for undertaking that investment will inevitably discourage creators from doing so.
IME, only my disregard for my financial circumstances due to my focus on investment in goodwill has prevented me from devoting my efforts to obsessively speaking on the issues that induce me to sperg out the opinions I cannot suppress elsewhere. I note I am nearly unique in that regard, and have watched dozens of folks more realistically responsive to incentives fly this coop.
I remain absolutely confident that Hive's ability to prevent plagiarism, scams, and spam can be maintained without enabling the incalculable harm that comes to our community from the historical and continuing censorship of creators of content odious to well staked individuals and the Hive oligarchy.
This is debatable.
I am one of the content creators who has taken the most DVs on this platform, and it has had nothing to do with the content I create and, if you haven't noticed, I put in my effort consistently daily - regardless. But, I understand enough that this place doesn't pay a salary, nothing is mine until it is in my wallet, safely behind my keys.
Also, if you haven't taken note, many of the topics that are getting downvoted here, I actually write about too - so it isn't "ideological suppression" is it?
This is a bit of loaded nonsense.
I appreciate you disagreeing with me, although rather than simply stating you consider something nonsense, I'd prefer to be schooled in detail. However, you have done me a courtesy of replying when I can see you have much else to do, and have been doing at no little cost to you, so am content with your courtesy.
It is this bit. Hive empowers creators and it is these staked users who delegate power to them through votes and other ways. The value of the token is dependent on these staked users and the demand on the token and, by way of this, staked users do what is in their best interest (act how they want) to satisfy their desires. A content creator might desire reward, but they know that the stake decides what is rewarded and very importantly, what is not rewarded.
If a person wants to drink clean water from a shared river, they will do what they can to stop people polluting it. The definition of what is "pollution" might change from person to person, but each stake holder has a stick with a net of varying sizes to do what they think makes the river cleaner, for them. You might not agree on what they consider pollution, but they might not agree with someone shitting in their drinking water. There is a lot of shit and much slips through the net, but at least there is the chance to filter out the biggest chunks - but the only one's who can, are those with a net.
It is natural that people will protect what they own from what they believe is harmful to it.
You are kind, indeed. I don't disagree with anything you say here, and find your analogy for stake appropriate, because in the Western USA in the 19th and 20th Centuries, water use and rights were quite contentious. In fact, they still are, and Oregon even claims water that falls on the roofs of private homes, despite fee simple title.
Where a commercial concern such as a rancher or grower wanted to control a water source, grazing cattle without fencing off that water supply has been used to preclude other uses for that water, as you suggest water fouled with dung will do.
I am sure you will agree that circle jerks and bot networks extracting rewards from the pool by collusion instead of the community curating content to deliver rewards to creator's accounts are comparable to polluting the water supply in your analogy, or at least I hope you will. I am aware of highly staked Hive users with ~10k accounts, probably more by now. It is difficult to imagine uses for that many bots other than as rewards pool extraction mechanisms.
The fact is that not all rewards on Hive are PoB, and not all voting activity is dedicated to benefiting the platform, community, or token. Some of it is to extract as much ROI from the rewards pool as possible, by any means necessary.
Flagging accounts into negative can be done with just one well staked account, and I'm sure you've seen it done on Hive as have I (I'm including Steem before Sun Yuchen used his stake as he saw fit, as well). I've seen content creators I consider valuable to the platform driven from it by this means. It's happening right now to @logiczombie, @lucylin, and others. The things they have to say, the way they say them, or why they say them may not be your cup of tea, but I'm also sure that you are dependent on a diversity of views on Hive to make your use of it valuable to you.
If everyone just agreed with everything you say, there'd be no point in saying it, after all. Flagging creators to drive them from the platform for any reason other than spamming, scamming, or plagiarism is not beneficial to Hive, the community, token value, or you personally. The experimental nature of the endeavor has left such abuses possible, and this has greatly contributed to Hive not gaining new users, keeping users it attracted, or enabling stake to be more widely distributed and increase the decentralized governance of the platform.
Sun Yuchen taught us all the danger of stake too concentrated, and the only thing keeping that from happening to Hive again is...nothing. It's in fact happening right now. Yuchen just exercised his sole option odiously, while our current collaborative oligarchs less so. Stake requisite to governance isn't concentrated in one account, as killed Steem, but it is held by very few whales that do use it covertly in ways that harms the community, even if most of us aren't getting flagged to the point we receive no rewards for months on end, have our reputations turned negative, and end up with our every post and comment greyed out, almost exactly like censored material on extremely censored social media platforms like Fakebook, Twatter, and Goolag.
That's not free speech. That's censorship, and it's bad for Hive. Some people seem to find it useful and have the stake to undertake it. @ura-soul is a valuable content creator, a witness, and a good person that is beneficial to Hive and the community. There's no good reason he's getting flagged.
You've been flagged in the past and you also realize that if it was still ongoing to the degree it's now happening to @logiczombie or @lucylin you wouldn't be posting here anymore. Just because it's not happening right now doesn't mean it won't happen at any time. I would consider it a bad thing if it was happening to you, and it's a bad thing to happen to anyone not scamming, spamming, or plagiarising. Flagging to control rewards is just greed. It's got no place on Hive, and the code should prevent it.
The suppression is of post reach/discovery - and thus suppression of the message - and also of the hive allocated, which thus then suppresses the economic growth of the channel/creator involved.
Votes have very little to do with this. Most interfaces don't hide them and unless voted into Trending (most don't read there) which is only dictated by the value of the votes, not by the value of the content, it doesn't help at all. On your Vybrator interface you can have it seen however you like - which is great and like I said - Finally! - you will never have your message suppressed in any way again, no matter how many downvotes you get that remove HIVE. Congrats!
Now there is no reason to keep trying to get support remove downvotes from the Hive base layer, since HIVE no longer dictates if your posts are seen or not in any form. You can have the Trending you choose and no one can affect it. Problem solved.
Oh, unless this is all really about earning HIVE and not protecting your ideologies at all.
There are a few ways posts can be discovered on the bigger hive sites, but generally they lack even the most basic discovery features such as 'related posts' and 'suggestions' etc.
This is mostly by design since the aim is to keep focus on new posts that are up for being voted on currently as part of the POB process.
What traffic data is available to corroborate that assertion?
Most of the comments I get and new followers come when my posts are in Trending and not at others times. I personally always check trending and a few other places.
Within the VYB community that is correct in theory - but at the same time there is limited growth potential in a space with limited capacity for monetisation in a world that relies on money to do the most basic things. I will be helping market and promote/evolve their project (and others) for free, as and when I can.
I have literally never suggested doing that. You won't find any of my posts where I suggest removing downvotes from the Hive base layer. I have only suggested reducing the amount that are available for free since the current figure of 2.5 per day is arbitrary and has never been optimised.
As with all of the things I am reiterating to you here again, I have stated numerous times that reward pool payouts are relevant and vital to Hive's growth as it stands since Hive already has better designed and marketed competitors that are already thrashing it based on it's ability to offer censorship resistance. Economic support of creators is a powerful tool, but only if well managed.
Luckily, you can sort your posts how ever you want now... how fortunate!! Of course, it was always possible earlier too.
Most users use peakd, not hive.blog - peakd sorts things differently and uses communities to filter information.
so it is about the money.
It wasn't arbitrary, it was well discussed openly and publicly.
Invest in those places then - make your money on them and then you will have all you want.
The most successful social sites tend to operate on post suggestion algorithms powered by tagging and other parameters.
I think you have missed the point of the specifics of my question here. You said that most people view content on trending pages, but peakd has several trending pages (which I use a lot). PeakD provides traffic data via Matomo in the tools area, but it isn't possible to see stats for the trending pages in comparison to community and profile pages afaik - which is why I asked if you had data to backup the idea that people don't use trending pages.
The entire Hive blockchain is powered by money, it's essentially what motivates creators to get involved a lot of the time - it's what powers the development and it is disingenuous both to try to claim that being involved in the economic side of Hive is somehow 'negative' and also that I am saying that money is the only relevant point or even a high priority. I have said none of this and you are manipulating here for your own reasons that seem distasteful at best.
It was arbitrary in that it was not based on real world data since none was available at that time. Now we have data it makes sense to measure it more accurately.
I will use whatever works best to achieve my goals (which actually include helping humanity evolve beyond money, ironically - but that's not so easy when almost everyone is trying to move in the opposite direction). For now I am open to continuing to work on Hive and to make use of the many years I have put into it.