Open Letter to @transisto, @drpuffnstuff and @moeknows
I address you three specifically because over the course of this quarrel, I have found you reasonable, respectful and tolerant enough, if not reconciliatory.
@transisto i read your open letter to @haejin, including his response to it, and whereas I might not entirely agree with some of your demands, I respect your motives and intentions to quell this quarrel. And that for me is enough to know that you have the best interests of steemit at heart, and therefore someone I can trust will listen.
I have also particularly had several long conversations with @moeknows and with @drpuffnstuff which in deed gave way to a mutual followership I am proud to defend. I also know that @em3 days ago, reached out to me to pass on a reconciliatory message to @haejin out of, I believe confidence in me, despite our parallel positions.
What does all this mean? It means that we share a lowest common denominator, and that is respect. I cannot be more proud.
Of course I have been stingy here and there. We all have, under the boil of this quarrel, but whereas now with hindsight, I recognize that I probably could have in the few stingy instances, perhaps voiced my opinions in a more cordial manner, there are three issues, and opinions I retain, but about which, in the spirit of ending the on-going quarrel, and for the overall good of Steemit, I here wish to share with you.
Recognize they are only my opinions about which I hope I can convince you to intervene, just as much as you have intervened to defend your other opinions and demands outlined in your open letter, and in several of the comments you have been making to justify downvoting @haejin.
First is the matter of the indiscriminate trail-downvoting, or you might call censor of both the comments and posts of @haejin’s followers. I speak from a position of knowledge, having been a victim.
What are your thoughts on this @transisto? Is there anything you can do to intervene and cease this, as it not only fans the quarrel, but is outright wrong and bad for steemit.
Pardon me if I am wrong, @transisto, but where is it recommended that even constructive comments ad posts be flagged? Are there circumstances you can give with justification, when constructive value-adding comments can be downvoted?
For the record, you @transisto do not do this, and I shouldn’t probably be asking you these questions, but seeing as I could not address the same to the others who do it, and whom, in the current boil of this quarrel, cannot possibly be expected to coolly respond, I here ask them, hopeful that we can share thoughts on it.
Second is the systematic spamming of @haejin’s blog every now and again with mockery and spite that easily passes as racism.
What @transisto, is your take on this? And by this, I would wish that you for the record state your opinion, so as to ensure that whereas you disagree with @haejin, you are not seen as condoning any such actions.
My personal opinion of course is straightforward. The practice is wrong, and wrong.
We all know the value of the comment section of any given blog in so far as allowing free and constructive discussion is concerned, which, if i have my facts partly right, is what Steemit is premised on.
It is after all, in part, owing to the comment section, that your open letter managed to reach, and in deed elicit a response from @haejin seeing you dropped a link to it on the comments of one of his posts. In his reply, @haejin did the same in your comments.
That is evidence if needed, of the importance of the commentary space of our blogs in times of disagreement as in times of agreement.
But notice, @transisto, that you had to upvote your comment containing the link so as to make sure it stood on top to get @hajein’s attention. @haejin did the same in his reply to you.
The point I am struggling to make, @transisto, is that had you or @haejin not self-upvoted your comments, moreover with high percentage, those comments would have either been downvoted to invisibility, or buried away, in this case on @hajein’s blog, in the spam after spam that is posted there.
Simply put, spamming on @haejin’s blog is uncalled for, as it is really indecent and only serves to inflame the quarrel, just as does the systematic downvoting of constructive comments.
Again, you are not involved in any of this, but again I would wish you state for the record, your take on them, for the information of those using it. It is possible seeing by the response to your open letter, that your opinion can positively impact on the direction this quarrel takes on from now onwards.
Third is the use of bots to sell votes, in such a manner as makes it nearly impossible for the community to reign on them, just as is being complained against @ranchorelaxo.
I notice you also use bots and pay with your SBD for their votes. This is not a castigation of any sort, as I am personally more likely to use them at some point!
However, to the best of my knowledge, bots do not differentiate between good and bad content as they are only interested, it must be, in earning. Is not that as bad as the identical charge so often labeled against @haejin, namely of ‘not engaging with the community’.
Is that the same charge you insinuate when you say?
You do not up-vote anything other than your own posts.
What is the difference? How do bots engage with the community? Do bots upvote anything other than what they are paid to upvote?
And seeing that you use, and therefore promote them, does not that bring contention, the impression of a double-faced approach when it comes to castigating @haejin on an identical charge?
And then, you might have also noticed another on-going quarrel involving @grumpycat that has unfortunately been overshadowed by this one we are engaged in.
Without delving deeper than is necessary in the context of this discussion, let me say that if I understand anything about that quarrel, the crust of its matter is that @grumpycat has taken issue with some particular bots he deems and with evidence, to be involved in mischievous last minute upvoting.
Again, I raise this issue because @haejin has been accused of it, not by you as i have not heard, but by others.
What, @transisto, is your take on that matter of last minute upvoting by bots? Seeing as you use bots, would I be wrong to conclude that you have no problem with last minute upvoting done by bots, which under other circumstances, qualifies as voting abuse?
And there you have them: my three issues.
But now that aside. And when all is said and done, for me, and I have no doubt for you, the question is: how do we move forward from here? You should know I am for one, open minded enough to listen and consider, seeing as anything otherwise is detrimental to this platform to which I owe my highest allegiance.
I will be writing to you a second open letter with my thoughts on what is to be done. Meanwhile, I encourage your mediation over this quarrel, as so far, you especially have, in my opinion, remained cool headed, and retained an air of neutrality.
Push ahead with the mediation @transisto. Come up with some arrangement for a way forward. But a word of caution:-However you plot to resolve and end this quarrel, it is my thinking that none of the two antagonistic sides can be seen to have won.
The reason is that in the aftermath will, on the side of the perceived loser, be left a desire for vengeance that will only shortly afterwards rear its head in the earliest opportune time.
On the other hand, namely on the side of the perceived winner, will be left an euphoria of vindication, the kind that easily fans the flames of resumption of hostilities.
This is what I believe, or at least it is what I think I believe. At any rate, I hope you will show the courtesy of responding to the few matters I have here raised. Until then, good steeming!
Meanwhile seeing as my comments are sytematically bot downvoted, and this could find difficulty reaching you @transisto, @drpuffnstuff and @moeknow, and yet if anything, i am hoping for your individual take on the 3 matters, i am sending you direct links. Thanks again.
Yes, this post should not have been flagged. It is wrong and equally an injustice. The group of accounts that have flagged you are all owned by bernie. As far as I see, none are the Stewards of Gondor or @fulltimegeek
It is my opinion that the post is too long and unlikely to get a response by transisto... though it would be nice if he did. He typically seems to be short on time and just chime in with brief comments. IDK
I will ask a few others to upvote your Post (though I don't know how far down it is and if a few minnows will have enough to bring it back up... I will request it neverthe less.)
I am glad for your reasoned responses. But what have i to say, if not the same conclusion i have personally now come to, namely that the owners of those accounts and not @haejin, are the first aggressors, and they, not @haejin have the first responsibility to show the good will to end this quarrel.
Otherwise to extend peace feelers, while at the same time raining blows on your target/victim hardly passes as honest, and is, you can say, hypocrisy.
So while i sympathize, with those whom like me are victims of this whole quarrel, i don't see how @haejin can help it, if those who sympathize with him, take it upon themselves to fight back in his defense.
@haejin can reign on them, you might say, but to what end? What is the motivation? Do you jump in to stop friendly forces that come to your help, when you are taking in enemy fire ? I don't think so. I wouldn't if i was in @haejins shoes. And if you are honest, you as well wouldn't.
But now, when all is said and done, what is the way froward? The same i have recommended from the start, when out of sympathy, given what i came to understand from independent weighting of the matter, i took to @haejin's side, sworn to stand by him to the very end, and at all costs.
What is that? Peace.
But as i have said before and will here again, it is only fair, if not obvious, that the 'other side' has the responsibility to show first good will.
Until then, @haejin remains only a victim to whose defense sympathizers like i, are daily coming to as more will.
I am sorry i am kinda @jumbled up as i write this @public-eye, but i wanted to respond before leaving for some errand, so my thoughts ate not really here organized, but i hope i have made sense.
Finally, you can say whatever you like, but the truth is, the first group you should reign on is the 'other side' otherwise, its futile, and futile. Nobody in @haejin's shoes would have any option but to defend himself. And nobody in his shoes would certainly turn away any help from those who come to his aid.