Breaking DRAMA - READ ALL ABOUT IT. ___ abit goes on flagging rampage
Alright fellow Steemians breaking news here on Sunday afternoon, a late breaking story... @abit is flagging accounts that have been up-voted by whales. A quick read through the comments shows those impacted think this is a bad idea and those who are not impacted think it is great.. Or they are nervous. Or they didn't see it, or they don't care.. or some other feeling.
So, our reporters on the ground have noted, the flagging appears to be inconsistent and only focusing on "Some Whale Votes". It is also viscous at 100%.
Also a source has told our team that the whales have been trying to coordinate an experiment where the whales do not vote, hence allowing the dolphin and minnow votes to be more effective. It appears abit has taken things into his own hands.
What impact with this have on the total reward pool? None. The reward pool will still be fully awarded, just perhaps to different people.
We will be following this test/experiment as it develops. check here for updates @steemfeed
If you have something to say about this drama or others and don't want to use your own account please email me at [email protected]
abit's link below.
There are many people in the community that feel strongly that the current distribution of stake is preventing the platform from scaling to billions of users. There is pretty much no incentive for a 'regular user' to buy SP, because even a relatively large investment of a few thousand dollars does not provide practically any influence. Figuring out a way to make the platform more appealing to 'regular users' to invest is really a key issue that needs to be solved if we all want our stake to grow in value.
The million dollar question is how do you achieve this in a way that is fair to the original stakeholders, and does not open the doors to abuse. Here is a post with some thoughts on the subject:
https://steemit.com/steem/@timcliff/whales-can-the-community-buy-out-a-portion-of-your-influence
The initiative that @abit is an agreement with many of the whales to not vote for a period, as an experiment to see what happens when the dolphins+minnows get more influence. It is an experiment. It is not the solution to the problem.
If the experiment helps the community to reach a consensus on what that solution is though, then it will be doing everyone a great service. We need to figure this out / get this right in order for the platform to scale.
I'm not opposing your thoughts but I would like to a quote of my post today about the meaning of consensus for Steemians to understand and discuss.
Real consensus is not possible in centralized structures. We can't solve social problems with centralized despotic authority, regulations and power clustering.
Consensus (consent) can only exist when:
a) - Everybody is involved in building solutions for the community;
b) - Everybody is informed with proper continuous feedback;
c) - Everybody knows the risks of taking that decision.
Consensus is a general agreement on a proposition to act and change the destiny of all the members of a community and face the risks involved.
Consensus can be "good" or "bad" because collective decisions involve risks that reflect in all the future of the community.
Any consensus in equalitarian groups can be right or wrong about the consequences of the collective choices and actions agreement.
When there is manipulation in the discussion of collective solutions, by self-interest people or groups that fight for Power then it can't be called consensus, but an imposition of a hierarchical structure.
Consensus exists only in equalitarian groups, where everybody has the same rights to express their will and importance by influence and be influenced by all the others.
The effect is that a dolphin or big fish-vote is worth a lot more then it is when the whales "staff-pick" content. I gave you a $0.14 upvote from zero @charlie777pt - it would only be worth $0.07 if the whale votes. In return you get a more real view of what the users, not the whales - but the users of Steemit like and upvote.
Thanks for your comment and vote.
Sorry for not being a tech/number guy so that I could totally understand the depth of your words as an experimented member that I know understand very well this subjects.
My question is that whales that listen to the users (and I see you doing it every day) and create consensus around good decisions that will benefit the community and all the stakeholders are the ones that maybe will profit -and enjoy the pleasure for supporting and good cause- for their very risky investment on a totally new experiment crossing people and money.
Personally, Steemit has been a very good personal experience in itself and for me as well.
This is personal opinion but the first idealism of steemit by the creators was imagined by them, but it had a proposition that a lot of people was expecting for to happen and explains their visionary success seen in actual Steemit.
One of the contradictions we have to solve on Steemit is that for the dream to became true, investors had to sponsor it.
I think that the awareness will open doors for discussion and consensus, I would say some kind social concertation between all the classes on Steemit, to avoid disruptive strategies that benefit nobody.
Please see my other comment in this post about the possible strategies to change people and the path of social networks.
Your welcome, I have made a proposal for the issues we have seen now for almost a year, I think it is a very fair proposal that investors+whales+users+viewers can live with, I include it below:
https://steemit.com/witness-category/@fyrstikken/voting-power-to-the-people-and-curation-rewards-to-the-investors-please-bookmark-and-read-later-if-you-are-busy
Thanks, enlightening numbers for a support of a better vision in my philosophical writings.
I like the interdisciplinary approach of knowledge, Philosophy vs. Numbers ( i wish I was better in this range- but learning)
Thank you very much for the added information @timcliff - You have helped round out the story.
Thank goodness for this development! I was worried we would have a drama free week.
I know right, this poor account has had nearly nothing to do. Just think how many posts will be spawned from this "test".
A drama dream come true! 😊
I'll say.
Okay, I am going to resteem, because it seems like fairly responsible drama reporting without stirring the pot too much.
If a riot did happen... I could cover it.
You are shameless.
lol
I already feel like I'm making more money. :-)
Feel it!
Well, we experiment in Steem and forget about individual and global esteem, besides the bad image of steemit projected outside .
People are just numbers to play with, like numbers and black boxes with no feelings maybe just monkeys in a cage for an immoral "animal" experiment.
This is not an experiment it's a disruptive strategy for change in a social network with people.
Quote from my downvoted post today:
"Some contradictory philosophical problems on Steemit I would like to clarify all the possible strategies for change that can be used or are already happening all mixed and in collusion:
a) - Cooperative strategy: based on consensus where everybody has the power to participate and have influence in a collective decision, signs of an equalitarian society
b) - Destructive strategies:control self-interested groups inducing chaos or manipulation by trying to control the collective resources pool or creating proposals that affect the flow of resources, vision, and mission of the network, signs of a dissolving society.
c) - Hierarchic or Oligarchic strategy: propositions for a change of the community by 1% of power owners of organizations inside and outside the community and characteristic of a hierarchic society."
Excellent points @charlie777pt I will be taking some summary quotes and will likely use this one.
Thanks a lot, use it, please, I'm honored.
Following you.
And thanks for bringing up this "experiment" in this post.
Posts on Steemit should have an option of labeling it with "Please, Whales don't Vote". lol
Being voted on Steemit by a whale is a trigger for other whales practicing shooting in a target hanging on your back.
Resteemed.
Hey cool. Thanks man.
I'm watching it too. But it doesn't seem a significant test to me
Seems pretty inconsistent. I think I would back it up, if there were criteria set.
This is bad news.?
I am sorry because steemit new, less familiar with the story.
could you please tell me the purpose of the play.??
@steemfeed
I report the drama, I try not to judge it.
I think the reason is to see how the rewards pool ends up if there are less whale votes in the mix.
thank you for the notice, I hope that all will be okay
I am sure it will be fine. Just silly whale games.
I hope also like that, this is just a game pope silly.
Thank you friends, I've understood now intent drama in your post.
Good luck.!!!
@steemfeed
This post has been ranked within the top 50 most undervalued posts in the first half of Mar 13. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $1.60 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Mar 13 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.
https://steemit.com/steemcleaners/@steemcleaners/steemcleaner-report-for-march-10-2017
More drama on this issue in the comments!