I kind of don't like delegation almost wish it was removed to be honest. I feel like it's abused more than good. By having each person control their own stake and vote with it it creates a better decentralized platform in my opinion. It keeps people engaged instead of being lazy and earing passive rewards simply for pushing out stake to another large account. That large account in many cases has one person controlling it and its 100% up to that person if something gets voted on or not. With that being said one person only has so much time in the day so often times they don't go through and properly curate content. Instead the votes just shoved on a few popular accounts.

There are however some very good curation accounts that do a lot of good and have welcomed a lot of new faces to the platform. Imagine being a new user and posting good high quality content but not getting a single $1 worth in votes after a month. That's going to be very unmotivating and lead that person to leave the platform for a while if not for good and honestly just have a bad rep in their view about the platform. However if occasional they get valued upvotes even if it's a few bucks worth it's extremely motivating and rewarding.

A closer eye should be watched over curation accounts and held accountable for abusing the curation such as upvoting. It creates a very unfair and unwelcoming environment and I'd like to see action on it asap instead of just shrugging and moving on. I'd love to see more Staked HIVE in smaller accounts giving them some vote value if they are doing things right. It's a HUGE task but if each one of us starts doing their part it becomes much easier, higher quality content and overall a more engaged and rewarding platform.

By having each person control their own stake and vote with it it creates a better decentralized platform in my opinion. It keeps people engaged instead of being lazy and earing passive rewards simply for pushing out stake to another large account.

This is a good point - and means more accountability.

50/50 rewards certainly isn't helping that.

75/25 encouraged me to buy stake, write a few posts a day, upvote my few posts, use remaining upvotes on others, continually restake my earnings, buy more stake, repeat.

50/50 rewards encourages buying stake, following any active curation trail that uses 20% of daily voting power, never writing any posts, profit for nothing but keeping HP staked.

EDIT: Would like to add the following.

75/25 typically would see more value from whales being drained over time out to who they upvote. In a few extremely rare cases some users on Steem upvoted themselves 10x a day for almost no effort, that didn't consume much of the overall rewards pool though. For example, a whale with 1 million SP and lets say they have 1% of the total Steem at the time. Over the course of a few years since they are giving out 3x more than they are taking in(75/25) they might only be .5% of the total Steem now(not counting inflation). In the long run the whales are less and less stake.

50/50 this is not the case, whales are able to maintain being whales. 50/50 is a total embarrassment.

I called bs on delegation when they proposed it.
It did exactly what I said it would, centralize who could get stake.
If each account had to vote their own stake, I think this would be a better game.
What game hasn't bots ruined?

> What game hasn't bots ruined?

Maybe Counter-Strike. You can play it without internet access.

I agree, at some point its blown out of proportions and allows individuals to have too much power.

I will only downvote you if you start going by the name kernel.

Otherwise keep it up <3

I'm thinking of using 'krenal', is that ok?

hmmm... lemme ponder that.

I should change my name, then people could easily get how it's spelt :P

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

I agree with you.

I also think any system based on DPOS without human integrity and maturity, will end up like....errrr..hive?

Integrity cannot be programmed in.
Integrity is required. (as unfortunate as that may seem to those who think technology is the answer to everything. It isn't.)

Yeah, the flags are supposed to help maintain some integrity, but I think the whitepaper based that on whales wanting to keep bad behavior in check. What is that bad behavior, autovoting? So if autovoting is bad, why not flag all autovotes? Oh no, its just some people who get autovoted that 'deserve' to be flagged, or some accounts that are autovoting, right ;)

The whitepaper also mentions keeping crabs in the bucket, with crabs preventing others from escaping the bucket... seemed a bit dark, although comical, but something was fishy about that analogy, seemed to promote some bad ideas. I forget what it was in reference to exactly at this point. I'm thinking of like regression to the mean, a la communistic/socialistic fake equality of some sort. Anyways, something to look into.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

The whitepaper also mentions keeping crabs in the bucket, with crabs preventing others from escaping the bucket... seemed a bit dark, although comical, but something was fishy about that analogy,

Yeah, I found that 'disturbing', to say the least. (and thought it 'communistic' in tone)

Integrity takes a back seat in positive feedback loops as it requires thought , not sheep mentality.

We cannot judge anything as 100% no or 100% yes
Everything you mentioned above has its disadvantages and advantages
But if we want to look at the bigger side, for me the delegation is the worst of them, it makes people more Lazy as bitcoinflood said.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

There are positives and negatives to it indeed.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

So what I found interesting, after acting independently and discovering some spam which you at least twice in this post pointed out is a good reason to downvote; I downvoted that spam. One out of two accounts has since changed their ways, and I applaud them. They are no longer making a mockery of this place and taking advantage of automated upvotes; showing signs of integrity once again. Now they're publishing actual content and at the same time setting a good example for others, instead of ruining their reputation while looking foolish and shady at the same time. Let's hope it lasts.

The other just keeps posting the same junk spam template over and over and over and over and over and over. Collecting automated upvotes for no reason other than spam. And according to you, that's not good, at least, based on what you say here.

That behavior pisses a lot of people off here. So, one saw the error in their ways and as of this writing has gone back to earning instead of being a lazy spammer (which is something nearly everyone here hates), and the other is just confused or something and can post a video in four places but can't seem to figure out how to post it the fifth place(here).

Anyway, cool story bro. Especially about the part where you think those downvotes on the spam are meant to repress some kind of truth or whatever that the world can't live without. How is downvoting spam links that lead to information on the outside of Hive in several different locations supposed to silence that content that doesn't even exist here? Did you forget to think about that part when you started rambling out this post?

And there are some things you said I agree with. Voting blind, in general, is never a good idea. Look at what happened to some of those folks who voted for witnesses by proxy, and because someone was in charge of their decisions, innocent bystanders lost out once the account shifted over to Hive. Personally, I don't even use auto voting services with my stake. Every vote I ever handed out was manually and after I actually enjoyed the content.

When I joined the platform I had NO IDEA that the rewards pool was shared between all people. Because I didn't know that, I rented SP and upvoted everything I did a lot. Almost nothing is explained anywhere. To outsiders it looks like you just come in, rent out delegation, write 10 comments and upvote yourself constantly and earn easy money.

Hive and Steem's problem have always been nothing is explained, there should be an introduction course you HAVE to take, answer questions, before getting a free account. If theres things were just explained easily up front a lot of the bad spam stuff wouldn't happen.

Where are you seeing folks upvoting comments like that?

As for needing an explanation, sure, for some it would be nice to have guidance but when it comes to decentralized media, it's not about what it does for you, it's about what you do with it. People have grown accustomed to having their devices do the thinking for them. So yeah a platform like this can be tough.

A little bit of common sense though will go a long way.

Back in the beginning days of Steem it was like that a lot.

Now that it's 50/50 rewards people just follow an active curation trail, don't post or comment ever, and earn money for doing nothing. Proof Of Brain has less incentive to function. It might cut down on spammers and self upvotes, but now you gotta downvote other people's posts in order to downvote people who are milking rewards pool by buying HP and following curation trails.

I've been around since the early days of Steem. I remember seeing the ugly and deciding to go my own way, which was just basically creating some content and hoping people would enjoy it.

I don't follow a trail. I've posted maybe four times this year. Been actively commenting when I can.

I don't blame the systems when there are problems. I blame the people. Who's controlling who? What you're seeing when you see what looks like a bunch of greedy sacks of shit with no integrity, well, that's humans. No amount of fiddling with knobs and twisting dials will change, people.

Just be what you want to see.

Would you apply the same logic to the systems of government, and say that US government for the last 50 years of endless wars/infinite printing money, etc is actually the people's fault?

Human psychology clearly shows people operate in systems on autopilot, and this is typically the super majority of people. If you are saying you want people to be me aware of what is going on and act accordingly(I want that too), that isn't going to happen in the next few hundred years, maybe even the next 500 years. Pretty much the entirety of human history is dismantling systems, fixing systems incrementally or making them worse, imposing terrible systems, creating new terrible systems. Where there are humans gathering to form systems that oppress there is no room for systems that don't, and almost all systems currently in place are very oppressive.

Humans largely follow psychopaths and sociopaths, those psychopaths and sociopaths create systems that people live in. Is it the people's fault they are born to follow, does one blame the 10,000 worker ants for following the Queen's orders? Or is it 100s of thousands of years of nature that the workers ant are following (human nature too)you are trying to fight? I am fighting that too by the way and totally agree. I want people to know facts, spot disinformation, see through lies, etc. Is it going to happen in our current environment? No. That's why I have been doing something about it via @informationwar for 3.5 years. That isn't enough and I plan on doing even more soon.

50/50 rewards hinders manual curators like me. I don't want 50% of the rewards for upvoting, I want to give 75% to the author. Curating/upvoting shouldn't reward 50%. It's a garbage change done by people who are misguided and think it will somehow improve things. It won't. It will cause more people to buy into it, power it up, follow a curation trail, never post, never comment, and constantly get profit for doing nothing than locking up HP. It should be changed back to 75/25, maybe even 80/20.

Well, I'm Canadian, so when I look at the government over there, I see positions of power held by people, so yeah, if there's a problem caused by people, I do tend to lean more towards the people being the problem. The president over there is just a man in a suit.

Those psychopaths are people, too. Sure, they deserve a good kick in the ass but unfortunately there are none near enough to me to prove that point.

I admire 50/50. The whole giving back to the consumer part is probably the most important aspect of platform to me. It's all a numbers game anyway though. If we had hundreds of thousands more dedicated consumers, like Youtube has for instance, where the consumers actually outnumber creators by a huge margin, a creator could easily make bank on even a 10 percent cut. Think about it. If there are thousands upon thousands of upvotes, and the plan is to give consumers a cut, they'd need a higher percentage in order to see any of that, since there would be more sharing in the percentage.

> I want people to know facts, spot disinformation, see through lies, etc

These things are all very important. So let's look at the post above. How the author paints this picture of being a victim and losing nearly everything they try to earn because the 'evil forces' are out to be evil.

In reality, according to this source:
https://hivebuzz.me/ranking

Sitting at number 14 in the 'Author HP' column is the author of this post. The author is one of the top earners on the platform, all time. 159178 HP earned through posting. It doesn't say how much HBD was earned on top of that but that would add to the total USD amount.

I think the author leaving that part out was intentional.

The post isn't tagged 'opinion' so anyone who's unfamiliar with the author's past might accept everything as 'fact'.

For instance, when tokenized communities (Tribes) began, there were plenty of problems and quite a few downvotes handed out by a lot of people in order to get a handle on the situation.

If you look really close at this post, it reads more like an advertisement near the end.

'Create a problem, then offer a solution, but for a fee.'

That's one of the oldest tricks in the books when it comes to manipulating a populace into spending money on something they may have not been interested in until there's a problem they didn't know they had.

krnel has written many great posts and I have known him for a few years, and if whales choose to upvote him that is up to them, people disagreed with it and downvoted him heavily for awhile. It isn't a surprise that some people ideologically do not like what krnel has to say, while others like what he has to say. He was downvoted on posts down pretty low previously as you can see if you scroll back through his posts. Did the downvotes choose to reduce his rewards from 200 usd per post to lets say 50 or 60? No, they choose to ideologically wipe him down to 10 or 5 and in some cases nothing. So right from the start we can conclude they are downvoted because they didn't like him, not because of disagreement of rewards. Disagreement of rewards isn't taking away 90% or 100% of someones post.

There always has to be a top earner, a 2nd, a 3rd, a 4th, etc. Whether or not he was 1st, 2nd, 30th, 40th, 100th is irrelevant, what matters is what was he justifiably that rank that he was? Why did those who downvoted him do so? Where their downvotes "legitimate". Having legitimate downvotes based on what the white paper on Steem said has "disagreement of rewards" listed as one of the reasons, which is a vague nonsense phrase(and isn't an ideology based on Proof Of Brain either). If this platform is to be a better Steem we must get away from vague nonsense like this, it's subjective and not objective. Objectively speaking krnel writes some pretty detailed well thought out posts. He clearly takes a lot of time to put together long posts and they are usually pretty interesting if you like politics/news/finance/crypto stuff.

Your reply to me included a fact of being ranked 14 in payouts, sure. The remaining sentences were used to paint him as a manipulator, a liar, etc. Throwing out such conjecture when you do not know the person at all is irresponsible, especially since you have a lot of followers who will listen to your input(whether you like it or not humans FOLLOW who they perceive to be competent or who are competent). Reputation is everything on this platform, and you do not know krnel almost at all but will have a lot of people reading and taking to heart what you say about him.

Maybe it's worth mentioning why I personally believe the author gets downvoted today. In the past, any time the author gained momentum and gathers a sizeable stream of support in the form of automated upvotes, the author placed integrity on the backburner and began churning out post after post after post with a similar scrambled and sometimes nonsensical writing style. It was quantity over quality that led to the author's work taking up sometimes more than 4 out of 10 slots on the trending page (the author did not mention that in the post when pointing out how bad it was when others did it).

It's my guess, based on history, reputation, and maybe even the deceptive nature of this post, if this author was not being downvoted, the author would take full advantage and begin filling up those trending slots again, with complete disregard for everything and everyone else around.

I think it has very little to do with what the author says and more to do with how the author acts.

I have no issues with the concept of top earners, or people doing better than others. That's normal and I can't stand the concept of things like 'participation awards'.

And I'm only guessing as to why I think those downvotes roll in. In my mind, what I think seems rational, logical, reasonable, it's based on past behavior and the trend is often more of the same; but I am not suggesting what's right or wrong.

I'm left feeling curious as to why someone who's being downvoted so heavily today would leave out so many details. The author paints the picture of being an innocent victim of something. That's not the picture I'm painting. It's the picture I was offered. It's takes two to tango but in this case there's only one dancing in this picture so it's only natural to assume there's a possibility the other side of the story is left out intentionally.

I'm certain if I threw my integrity on the back burner and started churning out multiple posts per day with the amount of support I've gathered over the years, I too would be downvoted. I been on this block awhile. If I did that, I know it would alienate members of this community. I choose to take a different path. One that makes me comfortable. Don't we all?

• edit
  And to clarify:
  > 'Create a problem, then offer a solution, but for a fee.'
  >
  >That's one of the oldest tricks in the books when it comes to manipulating a populace into spending money on something they may have not been interested in until there's a problem they didn't know they had.

When I wrote that, I was not saying that's what the author is doing here. I was simply pointing out something to watch for. Something I watch for, in life. Any time someone is selling an idea, I look to see if a problem is being created and if a solution is being offered for money. Literally every advertiser does it. The post does read like an advertisement near the end. I'm not saying it is. I'm careful with my wording.

Why you believe he gets downvoted and why he gets downvoted are two different things. One is subjective and the other is objective.

If we are to take a quick glance at the pristine/erudite/educated/intelligent people who were downvoting krnel(heavy sarcasm) here is what we see most of.

EDIT: Well, I can't upload pictures right now, will just have to link to posts with examples. Just scroll below to the comments and you will see what i mean. Basically them just calling him a "retard" and saying he is "trash". No real arguments on anything. The content of the posts I have looked at for him is well within what would be considered good writing, usually with many details and sources.

https://hive.blog/hive-122315/@krnel/gatherings-will-kill-people-but-protests-are-fine

https://hive.blog/hive-122315/@krnel/resisting-lockdown-2-0 from xxxxx

https://hive.blog/hive-122315/@krnel/bring-on-the-herd-immunity

Ideological bent against him, and hatred for him from the one person who was controlling multiple sock accounts(we all know his name, not gonna say it). Some people lost their minds against people who factually and critically look at covid stuff. There also was a upvote/downvote trail people were following so a lot of the downvoters on him were actually following one mega account. In reality only a few actual people were downvoting him overall, some were abusing their power entrusted to them. The evidence of this is seen by people dropping off of the downvote trail and eventually only "C" is downvoting krnel. Not gonna say the name, don't want to be ideologically downvoted forever.

The socks who were downvoting him months ago powered down and are no longer doing it. Why? Because it was all the same person across multiple accounts. I am not going to say his name, people know who he is. He had dozens if not hundreds of different accounts.

> Why you believe he gets downvoted and why he gets downvoted are two different things

I had hoped to make it obvious I already knew that when I said:

> I am not suggesting what's right or wrong.

So now let's apply the same logic to your argument. Are you claiming you're right? They're downvoting him because they think he's a retard?

I look at those examples. I see information. In this post the author talks about being censored or silenced, in so many words. I also see rewards there. I also see a few individuals supporting the topics and talking about it.

So at this point I'm sensing sensationalism and a narrative being pushed, hard.

Would it be fair to ask — in the search of truth — when compared to the number of active accounts posting here, what's happening to the author is common, or an isolated incident?

The post and some the backup choir in some comments really wants to make what's happening to the author sound like it's common, and everyone should be afraid (can't even mention a name it's so evil)?

So I'm curious now, @truthforce. Would you say what's happening to the author is common or isolated?

What happened to krnel has also happened to others. I've seen the downvotes rain down on many people over the years from the person I am not going to name.

Why am I not going to name the person? Because by simply doing so previously literally invited downvotes for months from 10 million SP pooled across multiple accounts, with his main accounts having 400k to 500k ish. Do you REALLY not know who I am talking about? There is only one person who ever did that and if you have been around here awhile surely you must know. Literally saying his name or even me vaguely talking about him could get me downvoted in the past, but I'm pretty sure he powered down everything and left when I looked as his accounts.

His username is someone who ran for President in 2016 and 2020 and lost.

Well, sure, downvotes happen. Usually there's a good reason. Sometimes it's just someone being a bully. These days, majority of the time, downvotes aren't being weaponized, they're being used to counter exploits.

But you didn't answer my question. You're still rattling off of this be afraid stuff.

It's clear to most, this is an isolated incident. It would be far more productive if the two parties involved came to an agreement and settled the dispute, rather than Hive bending over backwards just to cater to the author's desires. Nobody is that special.

because my entire project and dozens of us were downvoted for awhile. I'm not going to say his name publicly. You really don't get what I am saying. This person was responsible for downvoting hundreds of people just for his own pleasure and huge insane amounts of Drama on Steem. I don't know how you would have missed it but fine.

Berniesanders and his alts he had somewhere around 10million SP we know about to 40 million SP across many different names we don't.

If I get downvoted for saying his name sometime in the future I will be sure to come back here and thank you.

There was no good reason. It hasn't been happening lately because he powered down. HE was downvoting krnel within the last 9 months on multiple socks.

It was not an isolated incident, as I said, he downvoted hundreds of people if they pissed him off one time, said his name one time, existed, had an opinion he didn't like, etc. He created spam bots that spammed thousands of comments every day. How do you not know about this?

I get what you're saying. You're paranoid and rather than settling disputes with direct communication like civilized humans, you play this victim vs monster game. Yes, I'm aware there was a menace. Is it still happening? Are you dwelling on an isolated incident from the past? If it's done, is there still a problem? If there's no problem, what's the problem? Do you see where you said, "He was..."?

> How do you not know about this?

And how am I supposed to be fully aware of all events happening within your own personal bubble/echo chamber at all times? There's a whole world out here to explore and yours isn't in the middle.

Mentioning that name within this monster context happened a lot. Observing it was much like watching people run head first into a fist and then complain about being punched. Even the author of this post decided to antagonize, pushing the problem further away from being solved. Pointing fingers rather than learning how to meet in the middle and communicate.

I see one of the comments you showed me. And I'm thinking, maybe the guy lost someone close due to complications caused by that disease spreading around. I don't know for sure but did you folks ever stop to think about those who've lost others?

> If I get downvoted for saying his name sometime in the future I will be sure to come back here and thank you.

That's deplorable. To blame me for your own actions is disgusting. Did I bring any of this up? Did I share links and start talking about someone I didn't want to talk about (as if I can't control myself)? Did I force you to come here and start talking to me about the things you wanted to talk about?

Check yourself before you wreck yourself. I am baffled now as to why you'd call yourself Truth Force after forcing such despicably dishonest behavior upon me.

I wasn't sure at first about you, but after seeing your replies to me I now fully see what I am dealing with.

> I get what you're saying.

No, you really don't.

> You're paranoid

No, I am not. Stop making things up and be insulting.

> and rather than settling disputes with direct communication like civilized humans

Stop making up things that didn't happen. I always try to settle disputes like a civilized human, and in this particular case DID by talking with him over discord. It didn't work, continued to be downvoted for weeks until he stopped for no reason and moved onto the next victim. There's nothing civilized about it lmao.

> you play this victim vs monster game

I don't play a victim at all, factually laying out what happened isn't playing a victim card. Am I a victim in real life of many things, sure. I have been bullied to the extreme physically, sexually abused, stolen from, held at gun point, etc. Do I see myself as a victim to play a victim card and cry for a white knight to save me, nope. So again, stop making shit up.

> Yes, I'm aware there was a menace. Is it still happening? Are you dwelling on an isolated incident from the past? If it's done, is there still a problem? If there's no problem, what's the problem? Do you see where you said, "He was..."?

You feigned ignorance the entire conversation of what I was talking about, how you can now claim you were aware of a menace is some next level gymnastics my dude. Is it still happening? It was up until maybe 7 months ago. Not dwelling on anything, you seemed to not have any knowledge on what is being talked about and in my attempts to inform you of what happened you continually insulted me lmao.

> And how am I supposed to be fully aware of all events happening within your own personal bubble/echo chamber at all times? There's a whole world out here to explore and yours isn't in the middle.

Don't be obtuse. The point was how do you not know about the most famous and powerful serial downvoter. Again, you attempt to make me seem like I have an ego and you should know about me, I never said that stop making things up.

>Mentioning that name within this monster context happened a lot. Observing it was much like watching people run head first into a fist and then complain about being punched. Even the author of this post decided to antagonize, pushing the problem further away from being solved. Pointing fingers rather than learning how to meet in the middle and communicate.

Now you somehow know who I am talking about, cool story. How many thousands of people successfully asked Bernie to stop downvoting and he did? Like 2? You seem to feel you are a calm and rational person, why didn't you talk to him and get him to stop? Even if you did, there is no middle ground to someone who leaves comments on your posts calling you a "retard/faggot/racist asian slurs(against haejin and others), etc" So how about you stop pretending there is a middle ground to that, there isn't.

>I see one of the comments you showed me. And I'm thinking, maybe the guy lost someone close due to complications caused by that disease spreading around. I don't know for sure but did you folks ever stop to think about those who've lost others?

Do you ever stop to think about those who lost someone due to inhaling fumes from the coal that is mined? You use electricity after all. How about a kid who jumps off of a Nike building who is a child laborer with no hope, you are wearing those shoes right? I can give you better nonsense than you can give me my dude.

> If I get downvoted for saying his name sometime in the future I will be sure to come back here and thank you.

> That's deplorable. To blame me for your own actions is disgusting. Did I bring any of this up? Did I share links and start talking about someone I didn't want to talk about (as if I can't control myself)? Did I force you to come here and start talking to me about the things you wanted to talk about?

Doesn't get sarcasm, noted.

> Check yourself before you wreck yourself. I am baffled now as to why you'd call yourself Truth Force after forcing such despicably dishonest behavior upon me.

I don't think anyone else reading our exchange will think I was the one who was wrecked. Since you are baffled why I call myself that.

TruthForce:

[IMAGE: https://images.hive.blog/DQmWG6yJSvBWS2VMfPVZv48dTwzTPnWfE9ccSoZbjGG4R5D/image.png]

3.5 years of being peaceful and non-violent on the blockchain https://hive.blog/informationwar/@informationwar/about-the-decentralized-truth-movement-and-informationwar

Okay. So what you did just did here was promote yourself. Your marketing tool was making me look bad, in order to make yourself look good.

Thanks for the business card. I guess that means we're done.

I wasn't promoting myself, you directly challenged why my name is what it is, I then proceeded to logically inform you with the screenshot about Gandhi, then by giving you a link to the 3.5 year group I have been running that is directly related with why my name is what it is. My comment of this is buried like what, 10 comments in? So almost nobody is even going to see it, hardly self promotion, even if ignoring the first few parts of this explanation.

I'm not marketing you as a tool to make you look bad and me good. If you think that others think you looked bad in our exchange that is on you, you typed those words to me. I didn't make you type anything, nor did I somehow make you look bad so I can look good. If you think I look good in this exchange it's because of my typing, sure I agree to that.

Here is where I do the promoting, on that IW account. Same as you, I leave lots of comments. I manually curate in our IW tag and leave a standard curation comment to people(with links and helpful stuff), and I also engage with actual responses. Most of the time I just upvote.

I took the time to write this out because I don't want you to feel like I was using you for some sort of "try this one weird trick in marketing, advertisers hate this!". I truly wasn't.

[IMAGE: https://images.hive.blog/DQmesziGaib4qdoahBauaVjFCaadrZC8pWHMHoE6EhtEkNr/image.png]

No need to run this past me again. I'm well aware of what you did and don't require an explanation.

You're promoting yourself again. There's no need to defend yourself. "I this, I that, I am, I'm not..."

Just, let it go. I don't feel like talking in circles. If someone wants to come here and decide who's good, who's bad. I'd suggest to them they find more productive things to do. Communication breakdowns are normal in life.

I'll see you around.

I'm only recently back (last week). On Steem/Steemit you'd see some very powerful accounts (top 20 type power) that were known for arbitrarily downvoting things. Then you'd find somewhere that they made a simple comment in a post and up voted that comment $8. The comment votes would fly under the radar.

I voted on comments, but never my own. Why? I liked to encourage the engagement and discussion with people.

The truth of the matter is that if there is a way to exploit or game a system people will do it. This is also why all Utopian Ideas ultimately lead to failure.

We can try to discourage it, but I don't think we can stop it.

I'd say we've come a long way since then. I don't deny the dirty. To be fair to this community, I think it's not perfect but it's a lot better than those days.

Even with free downvotes, though at first they were used heavily, in order to solve a problem that was driving most of us mad, I'd say now, for the most part, the downvotes work more like a deterrent; a security camera of sorts. People know, eventually, their exploits will come back to bite them in the butt.

I don't expect to ever live in a perfect world. Without the chaos, there's no concept of calm.

P.S. Been awhile! Good to see you around again. Welcome back and all that.

Hey, I was away here and there as well for months these past years. I saw you start to post, keep it up ;)

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

I came across this yesterday:

Bee Wiki

It's pretty barebones now by the looks, but could be a useful resource

I feel like you did

Been posting since the middle of 2020

Perhaps objectively my posts are uninteresting

I'll let others be the judge of that though

I do like to spend a fair bit of time on them

Don't know what I'm doing

Don't fully understand how it all works on a technical level

I just keep doing what I think is right and keep my eyes open for enlightening information that other folks happen to share

I figure that's the nature of decentralisation; there is no central person or group that can be appealed to as an authority, or who has the responsibility to explain how it all works

>When I joined the platform I had NO IDEA that the rewards pool was shared between all people.

Out of curiosity, how is it that you didn't know this but did know where and how to rent stake?

>there should be an introduction course you HAVE to take, answer questions, before getting a free account.

I suggested about 3.5 years ago to have a simple checkbox system on sign up that has people go through some basic social rules - like spam sucks ass - link dropping sucks ass - link dropping and not commenting for 5 months sucks ass.

When I joined it was by finding some random stuff talking about earning money on bitcointalk.org. I didn't read the whitepaper or read any details at all. I joined steemit.com and started posting. Within a month or so I think I started renting out SP because I saw advertisements for it on other people's posts/comments on posts advertising it.

I would say that probably the super majority of users on Steem and Hive currently still don't know the rewards pool is shared, OR THAT THERE IS A REWARDS POOL. I didn't even know there was a Rewards Pool, let alone it was shared. I have been in crypto since 2013 and my background is Computer Science and Information Systems, but it doesn't help if I don't read EVERYTHING about Steem/Hive lol.

Why I asked is because I believe that the gateway people come in from and their early interaction often dictates their behavior on chain. Some learn better ways, some digress depending on the company they keep.

I reckon most people (at least those actually interested) know a fair bit about the reward structure, as based on their behavior, they target it the best they can to maximize. For me, I know enough about it that I realized that the best way to earn is to be part of the community, not a path of maximization and a lack of interaction.

There are lots of ways to approach Hive, some are more valuable than others.[IMAGE: https://i.imgur.com/XsrNmcl.png]

Only thing ive done with delagating is giving it to my friend to start and everyone who i plan to bring to hive I'll give them that to get started besides that I've never used it

Sounds like a good use :)

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Overall I share your views.

I think you misunderstand DPOS. It has nothing to do with delegating stakes. In my understanding DPOS is delegating governance to witnesses via stake based voting. Delegating HP doesn't delegate power to vote in governance, it just delegates away power in rewards distribution influence. When you delegate HP you still retain power to use your stakes in governance voting. However, we can delegate that power away to via proxy feature.

Rewards distribution, in my opinion, has always been a battle between short term gains view and long term gains view. Unfortunately, in this experiment majority chose short term gains. Hence, we ended up with bid-bots competition.

EIP changed that and also brought free downvotes that made possible for bid-bots to disappear. But as you state it also gave few a power to take a role of rewards policing. If it was up to me I would like to see how things would work without possibility of delegating stakes for rewards distribution purposes. However, it is very unlikely to happen.

To counter the issues your cover regarding downvotes it would take another force of hive power to mitigate issues when rewards policing goes against the benefits to the platform. That is also unlikely. Most Hive power that is even passively interested to participate seems to be delegated away. That leaves the last option of convincing stakeholders of wrongdoings when they happen, which is a difficult task on its own.

Lastly, I 100% agree about your thoughts on Leofinance and what a great work they have been doing for Hive and its community. However, even that is either being ignored or unnoticed by many stakeholders.

Hmmmm such aa great post

Then why not write something meaningful?
Maybe your opinion about the written things in the post.
Or about the opinion of other people.
You can easily engage in discussions.
Believe me, it is worth it in the long run.

> That's how you swallow bullshit and think it tastes good.

Sometimes I still feel like I swallow bullshit, but it does not tastes good. It never tasted good.

> There is an issue at the moment with one curator who has been abusing the stake of the curation account to self vote themselves a lot. Will this be dealt with, or ignored?

The only way to the "dealing with it" part properly is probably only the removal of the self-upvote function. Everyone could and would only upvote others. This blockchain would thrive. People would have to make communities, and support each other, instead of being selfish and greedy, and focusing only on their own posts. Because currently this is what the majority of the users are doing.

And this also explains the lack of real, human comments on the Hive blockchain. Nowadays the average number of comments per post is around 1-2, and most of those comments are bot comments.

"the removal of the self-upvote function. Everyone could and would only upvote others. This blockchain would thrive."

What if people created a second account? One to post/comment, and one to upvote?

There should be only one account per person with KYC ("Know Your Customer") verification to avoid any kind of misuse and abuse around the rewards.

I know, this is a very idealistic view, because many people already have multiple accounts, so the self upvote percentage could be already higher than it is visible on hivetasks.com.

That completely defeats the entire purpose of this blockchain, which is to be decentralized and not have a centralized entity controlling who gets to post. I created my account anonymously because if people doxxed me in real life they could try and get me fired because they don't like my views. If I wan't some KYC bullshit I could go onto facebook/twitter.

When I created my Steem account on 2017.05.17, the Steemit website asked me for my SMS number (and as far as I remember, it sent me a verification code), so I (and many other people) was not anonymus at the time of the account registration.
But I understand your point.
I think that this one (the abuse around the rewards) will remain one of the disadvantages of decentralisation.
Or at least I currently do not see any proper solution for it.

That is incorrect, you are anonymous at the time of account creation. They used a 3rd party service that just checked to see if a phone number was active. Steem or Hive do not have anyone's phone number linked to your account in anyway or have a way of idenfying you from that phone number. Now if you are browsing steemit.com or hive.blog without using a VPN your IP is idenfitied though.

I did not knew that they used a third party service for that.

Thank you for the correction and for detailed description about it. It is good to know that they do not have my mobile phone number.

Nowadays I am not using VPN (I used it in the past), so my IP address is indeed identified.

I have a lot to learn about HIVE and everything that's built upon it

I honestly don't understand how a person could vote on their own stuff

The notion makes me ill...

Taking away the option for an account to vote for itself won't solve everything, as @hempy points out

It won't "perfect" people into purely virtuous beings

But it would be a start

Yup, It's been talked about. As well as JYC you suggest. One person, one account. But it doesn't really fly with a lot of stuff, like not being targeted for your views, or your bank account, and goes against decentralized power...

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Nice read. It has cleared my mind to be active on LeoFinance. At what exchanges we can trade Leo token?

Good contents 🤗🤗🤗

interesting article, where does the money you get in the blockchain actually come from when there's no advertising involved?

Hive is minted every 3 seconds, which is when a new block is created. Each year that inflation gets cut by 9.5% or something, I forget. Those new tokens get paid to the witnesses and to a reward pool that's shared to all people who get upvoted based on the stake-weight of the person voting.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Wow, that was a lot to take in! It certainly was an in depth review of the kind of stuff that newcomers need to understand about Hive if this is their first time here. I definitely agree that there are a lot of great things on the horizon. Especially from the Leo team!

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Go Leo! :)

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

I agree with you thank for sharing your thinking

My best wishes and regards to you.
I am new here , keep me in prayers.
thanks
Good Luck.

I have been gone until last week for a couple of years. It is disconcerting that this still happens. Though you do still seem to be doing quite well on your posts. Maybe that is because it hasn't been down voted yet.

Yup, welcome back, it sucks. Yes, the post was higher in rewards because the inevitable flag had not hit. And yes even with that, my posts do well, but the point was more about getting to keep the rewards allocated by voters when you don't do anything wrong to get voted on. People aren't being allowed to allocate rewards based on their stake and earn curation, which is why I mention it happening to other people I vote for.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Awesome post bro! It's interesting how the same misguided dynamic of forced wealth redistribution has made its way into the ranks of Hive.

Sigh. I made a mistake. I should have just ignored your spam links and Hive should have just let you walk out of here with hundreds of dollars for nothing. While other people struggle, your bro here hooked you up with the easy road. Sorry for stepping on it.

Interesting that you'd use the word 'spam links' for content you don't like.
I share content to videos that I create daily around human/animal rights, crypto, society, culture, and my music. A couple of recent videos I created and shared links to had been taken down via youtube however I changed the links to other sites that hosted the content upon discovering this. It would have been admirable if you'd taken the time to inquire about this or advised me on what you'd disliked rather than making a post condemning my content but I guess it's easier to throw stones.

Interesting how, I wasn't able to actually form an opinion about the content, since the content didn't exist, unless I clicked a frickin spam link. I even asked you that day how much you'd spend on the links I offered you, and you did not respond. That was a joke.

Instead you doubled down and did the same post again with a video thumbnail, and link to a video outside. Because of those two instances of blatant disregard for autovotes pouring in, that you know in advance would come, I could only conclude you were being a lazy link spammer. You could have talked to ME that day, but instead you ignored me.

Anyone here can scroll through your blog right now and see how you've been ripping Hive off with autovotes and spam links. Many posts might look like a video on the outside but as soon as you click, one is often met with only the thumbnail.

And I did not write a post about you. Where the hell did you get that information? A couple lines about the deeds that are happening all over this chain and no mention of you, out of 2000 words, is not a post about you.

Don't pin this shit on me, man. It was your mistake. Now can we move past this? I didn't take those spam links and the abuse of autovotes personally. I'd rather see you on track and doing well, organically, with a shit ton of comments under those videos(why aren't there any comments under your videos). You need to work on attracting people, not robots. Don't mess around with shortcuts. It looks like you're just being used for curation rewards at this point.

I did not dislike the content. The content was nonexistent. A link is not content. The content exists elsewhere. I didn't click the link. How the hell do I know it's not a phishing site or some bunk like that? Face the reality. You screwed up. Fix it. Know better. Done. It's looks like you muted me, which was idiotic, because now I can't even help if you're still in a jam...and that just means I'm talking myself.

Perfect.

> One out of two accounts has since changed their ways, and I applaud them. They are no longer making a mockery of this place and taking advantage of automated upvotes; showing signs of integrity once again. Now they're publishing actual content and at the same time setting a good example for others, instead of ruining their reputation while looking foolish and shady at the same time. Let's hope it lasts.

I wrote that in another comment here. I was talking about you.

> I have been here since August 2016 and have earned the support of various people. Some manually vote, and some autovote.

Ouch! I've been here since August 2016 also. Your account was created just 1 day before mine... https://ethanwiner.com/Smileys/Confused.gif ¿¡aarff?!... ahem... erm... and when I grow up, I wanna be like you! LoL https://ethanwiner.com/Smileys/Love.gif

Semangat

I decided not to reward you with my personal stake:

1. Rant doesn’t add value to this blockchain in my opinion.
2. I didn’t find any financial content on this post. So to me it is a misuse of Leofinance tag. And I will be reporting it to the team.

That last part was related to LeoFinance, and the parts before that were related to that last part. Talking about LeoFinance as it relates to other content in the post and how different parts the blockchain operate and have operated has nothing to do with the LeoFinance community, OK content-reward officer.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

>Regardless, these people have chosen to reward me with their stake that allocated inflation to my content. But some people don't think I'm allowed to keep the rewards that others have allocated to me.

As someone who is no stranger to being downvoted heavily for months on end, the rewards aren't yours until they are in the wallet after 7 days. Up until payout, they are up for negotiation.

As for accounts that are earning 100s from automated link drops from other sites where they haven't bothered to reply to any of the very few comments they get for half a year - they should be downvoted. It isn't suppressing some kind of truth, all the content is still there to read for the very few who seem to actually click on a link out to another site to view and then come back to comment - it is ridiculous.

For the accounts that get some automated large votes and then spam to milk them - they should get downvoted too.

I say "should" but it is up to the stake to downvote or upvote - it is also up to the stake to delegate to accounts that upvote or downvote - delegation can be removed in literally 3 seconds.

>The information content itself matters, and if others value it and want to reward it (like I do), then that content should be allowed to keep the rewards

Again, the information may have value, but it doesn't necessarily have HIVE value. content that is spammed all over the internet on the very platforms that they are complaining about, doesn't have Hive value.

Many Hive users value Hive content, because this is where their stake is, their money, their future. Many Hive staked people value Hive people for the same reasons. If the same content can be found elsewhere without it linking back to Hive or bringing in Hive users willing to be part of the community, it doesn't have Hive value. If the accounts are dumping non-valuable Hive-content onto Hive for reward and often on top, then dumping that reward on the market, but don't even care enough to comment on Hive or support Hive in anyway - they aren't Hive people.*

>This is what has been happening to me for months now. I post for a bit, leave for a few months, come back, and still this 'curangel' account is there to downvote me over 50%-75% on average. A few times it was about 90% of rewards removed, and once or twice it was 100% due to another whale joining in the downvoting.

And for a little context in value - I haven't had a day off from Hive in almost 4 years and I am pretty well rewarded, I also put out decent quality posts daily and spend a massive amount of time on the platform for all kinds of things, including supporting others in various ways - you have still earned more than me on your main account - you might have other accounts, I don't know.

You are not a victim mate.

Right, so if a large account downvoted all your posts to 75% of what they were at in rewards, you want me and others to believe you would be totally fine with that, because " it is up to the stake to downvote or upvote"? ;)

I think I would here something more about "I haven't had a day off from Hive in almost 4 years..." and what you've done on steem/hive at that point, no? Or would you just be silent and not talk about it? You can get flagged as much as anyone wants to, to remove as much rewards as they or a collection of accounts wants to, and you are not a target of anything. If you were to talk about it, I could just end my comment with "You are not a victim mate." ;) Gotcha.

[IMAGE: https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/azircon/23tRxJDB4RLcxXi2izYqFQab6St2ro5XYoV8WsJN3c97syrF5W3UF8GHsALU7RXsnLEEQ.jpeg]

Oh yeah. As you mentioned in the post, you don’t much like hive. Your actions shows it. No worries to complain about how we govern this chain, but okay to take the rewards eh? You don’t like DV, why don’t you buy some stake.

You rant, and I will make sure I do what I can to take care of ya? Cheers!

Oooooh, someone is powering down, that means they don't liek Hive. Amazing powers of deduction you have there. Why don't you go tell that to others, like yabapmatt who is powering down to get into CubDeFi with a higher APR (publicly stated in discord, at least for Leo, maybe Hive too)? Ooops. Keep your fake-ass cheers for yourself, and your bullshit "go buy millions of hive to self-vote to counter the downvotes" argument, gimme a break.

Muted! Goodbye ;)

I will do whatever I want. You do whatever you can. Alright pumpkin?

Oh I am sorry... you mentioned CUB de-fi has higher APR? Thank you for that valuable information. I decided to follow your advice and get into the game....

[IMAGE: https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/azircon/23tSmaQKZUNQ9M9FGPaFKjPfHAKND8jkBqGNVjMxQR2xLL7P7wL8EteQfnQGcsgTwzftx.jpeg]

>Right, so if a large account downvoted all your posts to 75% of what they were at in rewards, you want me and others to believe you would be totally fine with that, because " it is up to the stake to downvote or upvote"? ;)

Happened for months to me too, and Hive definitely wasn't at the level it is now - so the rewards I was getting on posts after the DVs were just above zero daily. As said, you aren't the only one that has experienced this.

> Or would you just be silent and not talk about it?

I defended their right to use their stake as they saw fit - I kept posting as if it wasn't happening - I stayed active regardless. If what you`consider what you say to actually be valuable, the rewards shouldn't matter that much. Or is it that you will only speak if someone pays you to speak?[IMAGE: https://i.imgur.com/XsrNmcl.png]

> If what you`consider what you say to actually be valuable, the rewards shouldn't matter that much. Or is it that you will only speak if someone pays you to speak?

Really what you think? Come on now... Did I stop when I was getting flagged even harder in years gone by? Not necessarily. But at times I do stop posting, then come back. Did it many times with price low or high, at various degrees of flagging. And I haven't talked about flags in years since 2017 I think it was when there was the no-whales voting thing. So yeah after 4 years of near-constant flags, I dared to speak about it again :O

The speaking about it isn't an issue, speak all you want, but I think it does matter how you speak about it - but that is just me. At the end of the day, stake acts as stake does in all directions. Sometimes it will benefit you personally, sometimes it won't.