Bad Whales Flagging Content with False, Irrational and Hypocritical Excuses

In recent weeks, certain whales have increased their policing of rewards on the platform. It's arbitrarily determined, based on their own whims and predilections, not based on any criteria to determine if their claims are justified. The community is just letting whales flag people for their own reasons, not for any real, genuine, authentic, consistent, integrated code of conduct or philosophy to justify their behavior.

Bad whales are reducing visibility and rewards for content creators, under varying justifications that are hidden by generic messages, or none at all. Some content is of higher quality information that has more value and utility to help people in their lives, to understand themselves, and how to potentially change the world. They lack understanding to the degree that they think what they are doing is "good", when it's actually harmful and bad for the platform. They are acting against knowledge of what is good, right and true to learn about, like morality, or good knowledge to help increase a comprehension of ourselves and the world, or knowledge that can help Steemit become better. They don't like the good content (or apparently who supports it), so they act against it and try to diminish more people accessing it since it "doesn't provide value to Steemit" in their ignorance and inability to see the value.

I'm tired of the bullshit lies that bad whales use to drive down visibility of content that provides information worth being discussed. These are whales that attack the "smaller fish's" content because they don't understand the value the content brings to someone life, or to Steemit.com. They lack understanding so they engage in beavhior behavior from that base of ignorance. They have the power, and they use however irrationally they want.

source

Good whales don't flag content that adds value to the platform. Good whales don't make up lies to justify their flagging behavior.

Here is the copy-paste justification that @smooth uses to validate why he flags things:

Is this true?

Let's look at the post in question, and other posts that day and the day before, to see if @smooth applies his code of conduct or ideology on things being over rewarded or having too many whale votes. All users pulled are above 300k SP. @smooth won't give his definition of what is "whale swarming" and doesn't care about defining things for others to understand. He just wants to invent his own criteria and be free to apply that irrational behavior as he sees fit. Screenshots of his rationality on that are later.

So this post was over $90, wasn't original content, OK, flag it as expected...@berniesanders got to it at $120 just because @dan voted for it as you will see his ridiculous reason below:

https://steemit.com/fracking/@krnel/6-600-fracking-spill-in-4-states-during-a-10-year-period

What about the next post? It was in the $30s... and this one has a lot more vale to add, especailly related to Steemit, but apparently it;s not content that is worth being rewarded $30 for @smooth, or $50 for @berniesanders:

https://steemit.com/truth/@krnel/does-competition-in-news-or-information-markets-promote-truth

@berniesanders has ridiculous irrational justifications to flag this content.

@smooth has the same lame justification that he selectively applies to content he doesn't like, even though it does provide value to Steemit.

smooth: Downvoted, overrewarded due to concentrated whale voting

~$50 too much for @berniesnaders
~$30 too much for @smooth
Overrewarded?
What?
Concentrated whale voting?
What?
They aren't even being honest about it, or caring to explain how they go about their selective flagging of posts they don't like. It's all based on their whims.

Here are more posts from that day and the previous day, that @smooth did not flag, because he apparently likes the content, so even when it's rewarded more, and has more whale vests voting, it's ok and is good, but not other content like mine... LOL

https://steemit.com/food/@sweetsssj/miss-delicious-39-infusing-portuguese-food-with-asian-in-macau

Payout: over $100
no smooth flag

https://steemit.com/health/@heiditravels/why-i-love-coconut-oil-and-you-should-too

Payout: over $75
no smooth flag

The previous day had some posts that are temporally significant only, and don't add value to Steemit in the long term. No one will care about these posts after a few days. These posts are highly rewarded, with many vested users voting it up, yet they don't get flagged for the "over reward" or "concentrated whale voting" when they have more reward and more vested votes than other posts that get flagged. This suggests the reason is because the whales who flag content does provide value to Steemit, are doing so because they don't like the content or can't recognize value when it's presented and think the content removes value from Steemit... LOL.

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@kingscrown/bitcoins-price-hit-1111-11-usd-and-is-50-usd-away-from-ath-on-bitstamp

Payout: $134
no smooth flag

https://steemit.com/golf/@ats-david/steemit-scramble-pga-tour-the-honda-classic-preview-and-contest

Payout: $133
no smooth flag

@smooth flagged three posts yesterday, two of mine, one was only in the $30s but thec ontent and who voted on it didn't appease him, so it needed to be flagged... lame.

The other one who got flagged was https://steemit.com/funny/@lordvader/where-have-i-been.

---

How can a post at $50, or $30, that adds value, adds information that is worth learning about, be "over rewarded", while other posts have much more rewards, more whales voting, yet aren't considered "over rewarded"?

There is no consistency, no rational behavior.

Ever try to find out what this means? I did. What does concentrated whale voting meaning? How many whales does it take? How much vest weight? Well apparently it means whatever @smooth wants to invent it to means and aply it in any ways he damn well pleases. When you do something that is irrational, you don't have to explain it to anyone or define what your saying or doing, just say whatever you want and make it mean whatever you want subjectively, because words can mean anything apparently...

Next time you say your doing something for X reason, you don't even have to explain what that means, just make it mean anything you want and just keep being an irrational fool. Isn't that wonderful?

For anyone rational out there, that's not how definitions work. They have a specific meaning, even if you reinvent a word. When you use a word or term, and you make it mean whatever you want, and don't provide that definition to anyone,t hen you are creating a fantasy land of your own making where you don't think you have to be held accountable for what you're doing,and just do whatever you want based on made-up definitions to justify your behavior.

If you're going to make a claim that it's not fair to other lower paying posts, when "too many whales" up vote some posts, and the content doesn't matter, then you need to apply this rule everywhere for posts that go above a certain dollar value. Otherwise you're not consistent in you're claims to justify action. This is not being integrated, but disintegrated from inconsistency and contradiction between behavior that flags some posts with certain payout values and certain whale votes, but not other posts that have more rewards and more whale votes. This inconsistency and disintegrity makes one a hypocrite: "a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated belief". Integrity is an "adherence to some standards", and "the quality or state of being complete or undivided". Behavior that is inconsistent from claims used to justify behavior is being divided from oneself, to claim one thing and do another in hypocrisy. To claim a flag is being done because a post is over rewarded, or has too many whale votes, while other posts have more of each criteria yet are not flagged, is inconsistent, disintegrated, divided, hypocritical behavior.

Integrity requires consistency in behavior, not hypocrisy. Steemit requires integrity to set a consistent standard of behavior in the platform. If certain actions are to be done, because they are "valid" to an individual, then they are to be applied consistently to remain valid for that individual, otherwise it is hypocrisy.

This is bad whale behavior that is piking on certain posts they don't like. They don't like the content, they don't like the author, they don't like the whales who upvote, or a combination of those.

---

Let's look at @smooth's irrational justifications for previously flagging my original content that does provide value to Steemit and individuals with useful knowledge that people can use now, 10 years ago, or 10 years from now. That's how Steemit will have value over time to reward Stakeholders, through content that provides value not for 1 day based on picking a sports team to win at a free lottery, or some other fleeting information that is no longer very relevant to one's life after it significance passes. "Timeless" knowledge that has a use in people's live, to help improve their understanding of themselves or the world, has value that will attract people to read it beyond a day or week.

https://steemit.com/psychology/@krnel/trinity-of-consciousness-symbolism

Was at $100, not the most payout of that day, and I had another post at $200 that didn't get flagged.
Why did this get flagged? Because @smooth doesn't like the content. Then he decides it's over rewarded when it already had over 200 views, because apparently having 200 views in a short period of time indicates content that "is not the type of content that will help steemit attract, retain, or grow a user base, nor will incentivizing it with high rewards do so"

He has a problem with truth and morality posts, as you will see. This post was at $100 and he flagged it down to $70 and reduced visibility to quality important content that can help people in their lives at any era, now, in the past, or in the future. He sees no value in these types of posts, despite other people appreciating it and valuing it. Other posts had been done in recent days and after, that went over $100, but since they weren't about higher quality important knowledge to help people in their lives, that somehow attract people to Steemit, like game-picking gambling mentality that gives things away from free in a free lottery that doesn't reward content for content. Yes, that adds value through no real engagement. While the content I put out, gets meaningful feedback and interaction and engagement from some people, yet that is of no value to Steemit according to @smooth. Just upvote a post and comment about your favorite team or something and that's "real value" and "real engagement" to Steemit though.

Here is more original quality important information on morality that @smooth doesn't like getting to $100 again, so he flagged it to reduce the visibility and of more people learning from it and the rewards that reward the content creator for putting it out.

https://steemit.com/morality/@krnel/learning-about-immorality-leads-to-more-morality

smooth: Downvoted as disagreement on rewards.

Yet, go read the post, it's value and the people how comment who can actually recognize real value in life when they come across it, which @smooth apparently can't do.

Another on morality, my original content again, that @smooth flags because he can't recognize the value in it and thinks it's over rewarded at the least, most likely with the previous justifications that pots on morality or consciousness that actually has real value in people's lives doesn't seem to have value to him, or have anything to provide to Steemit's value, in his ignorant understanding.

This time my post reached $70, but that was too much for a an original content post on morality.

https://steemit.com/morality/@krnel/what-is-good-or-evil-the-good-and-evil-continuum-spectrum-scale-or-degrees

smooth: Downvoting since overrewarded largely as a result of swarm whale and trail voting.

Go read the post, see that other people value it because it has real world value in people's lives and isn't just some fleeting entertainment of fluff info.

---

One more, not original content to help people in any time period, like on consciousness or morality, but it was my most popular post ever, added info on Steemit to help people understand things, and some people gained value from it, yet not ignorant people who can't recognize information of value in the content:

https://steemit.com/socialmedia/@krnel/how-does-content-go-viral-on-reddit

Here is what others had to say about the post though:

@fulltimegeek

@whatsup

@creatr

@justtryme90

@thecryptofiend

@eric-boucher

@skypal

@ansah300

But apparently, that post was not adding value and actually prevented people from joining Steemit? What? The ridiculousness of these statements is baffling. What foolish statements!

There is a self-declared "content-police" made up of 1 or a few whales that go against valuable content that does add information relevant to Steemit to understand how it works, or adds relevant important quality information in our lives to learn about ourselves in consciousness, or morality. They can't see the value, so they flag it when it gets too high. At first $100, then $70, and now apparently at $30 for content that add information to understand ourselves or Steemit, it too high or a payout and has too many whale votes, despite other content having higher payouts, and more whale votes.

---

This behavior is sure going to encourage people to post on Steemit, right? It's going to attract quality content creators that deal with hard hitting issues, right? When you get rewarded by certain whales that other whales don't like, then you're going to get flagged for putting out content they don't like or think is over rewarded, when it isn't.

This is a new police, a "reward police" and "view police".

Steemit needs rational behavior. Not irrational justifications used to selectively flag and remove rewards from posts for ridiculous reasons like "not enough views", "I don't like it", "junk", or "over rewarded" and "concentrated whale voting" while more posts have more rewards and more whale votes. The behavior of bad whales exposes themselves. You judge, offend and insult yourself all by your own actions and behavior. Bad whales expose the hypocrisy of their actions all on their own.

I'm calling on others to step into this issue and set a consensus for better behavior so that this bad whale behavior can finally be address:

@dan
@dantheman
@blocktrades
@ned
@freedom
@jamesc
@abit
@val-a
@val-b
@tombstone
@michael-b
@michael-a
@rainman
@summon
@hendrikdegrote
@thejohalfiles
@transisto
@pharesim
@created
@proskynneo
@xeldal
@roadscape
@arhag
@riverhead

If other whales don't get involved to correct bad flagging behavior, or the community doesn't get involved, then this will keep going on.

Certain whales don't like it when other whales vote for content, so they selectively target certain content to flag.

The policing of whale-police flagging content based on views, and who upvotes, is not rational behavior for Steemit, and needs to be addressed.

No one individual, no the community, is able to counter the bad behavior if this behavior is not made aware to the community for people to address.

When someone posts content that took them a while to create, some whales want to say "hey, you haven't reached the 'view-count quota' yet, you're post doesn't deserve the rewards it got", or "hey,

If you're successful because of your content providing lasting value on the platform, you can't be too successful or else it's not fair to everyone else. Then a socialist-communist acting whale-police decides you don't deserve the rewards for the work you did. The whales who find value in certain content and reward it for the content are apparently not being fair to everyone, and it hurts hundreds of other posters who don't get rewarded for their content that some whales don't care to upvote. The communist whale-police doesn't want certain content that brings value to get rewarded and wants to redistribute the rewards away from that content, and reduce visibility of that content reaching more people for them to access the information within.

When you actively suppress important quality information that has use in people's lives to learn about themselves or the world, then you're acting against truth by preventing it from reaching more people.

If you are a content creator that creates too much content, and get consistently rewarded for your work, some people don't like that success, and don't like the type of content being rewarded so they invent irrational justifications to flag it and reduce visibility for more people to find it through the trending page. My posts get more views when they reach the trending page. That's a way for more people to access the content and learn from it. But, that's not desired for @smooth and @berniesanders, as they don't recognize value in these posts and just want to flag it for whatever irrational reasons they can invent and not have to rationally justify. They just want to be assholes yet think they are "helping" Steemit by punishing posts that get rewarded for content they don't like.

See if one of my original content posts on morality goes above $70, that's too much for @smooth. Important quality content isn't desired on Steemit according to @smooth, it has no value here, and doesn't help bring users. All he cares about is more users, thinking that is what will get STEEM to go up in price. The quality of content doesn't matter, it's all about quantity and the getting popular content to attract more quantity of users. An organization shouldn't care about the quality of its' products/services offered, it's all about quantity right? LOL. Content is what is being offered on Steemit to attract certain users or not certain users. So we don't want quality content creators on Steemit, according to @smooth, or at least not rewarding them for creating their original quality content. They can keep creating quality content, but if they get rewarded by whales who value the quality content and information is provides, then @smooth decides it's not providing valuer to Steemit, or it's not fair to author authors trying to make money. We have to even the rewards out based on everyone getting some. Don't reward content for content, that's bad for Steemit.

Please flag away bad whales and others who don't want this information getting out to more people for the community to be aware of bad whale behavior. This is a problem that needs to be addressed. Letting whales flag content, reduce visibility, because it doesn't have a view quota; or goes over a reward quota for content they don't recognize value it provides to Steemit or in people's lives; or is voted on by whales they don't like; is an irrational and ridiculous code of conduct to engage in and will not help the success of Steemit. Trying to punish content that adds value to Steemit, or individuals lives, is not a path to success for a platform, nor a way to retain content creators or promote more content creators from joining Steemit. This is bad whale behavior.

This data collection is annoying to do, but it finally needs to be done to expose this bad whale behavior. THe community needs to be aware of whats going that the don't see because it's not being done to them, And as usual, most people will probably not care, since they are not directly affected. But this does affect everyone, as this bad whale behavior is accepted by the community if the community doesn't do anything to stop it. It will simply keep going on and one, and get worse as it has in my case, not with a +$30 post getting flagged to the $20s for bullshit irrational justifications. If this would happen to you, you might care more about what was being done.

I have demonstrated that @smooth has been targeting my original quality posts that get much less rewards that other posts, simply because he doesn't understand the value of truth or morality and doesn't want it to get visibility on the trending page or have the rewards some whales gave it for the quality and value it provides.

If you don't know how content is creating value on Steemit over time, and its not about the daily or 30 day reward, but about important information that adds value to Steemit, then check out @dan/@dantheman's post on such a topic Building Long Term Value from your Blog.

This about irrational behavior, selective punishing of certain valuable content that bad whales deny has value to the platform itself, top users on the platform, and to people outside of the platform. It's not about the rewards.

Flagging the reddit post, meh ok even through it does provide value maybe it was over rewarded, ok, I get it. But flagging other posts that actually are original content I make, that is about important knowledge that can help people in their lives now or decades away, and was valid to help people decades ago, is not ok. It makes no sense. It's not rational. It adds value to Steemit and people's lives. It's not being flagged for concentrated whale voting or simply being over rewarded, as I demonstrate other posts have larger concentrations and more rewards. It's about the type of content, being too serious, too informative, and @smooth being unable to recognize it's value. I have made other posts that go higher in payout, with more whale votes, as have others, on the same day, but they don't get touched. This is not consistent rational behavior.

If my original content -- that adds quality information to Steemit, and can add useful knowledge to people's lives to affect them in reality -- was not flagged, then I would've likely let it continue as I don't even want to be doing this. But when I put out content, that matters, that adds value, and it gets flagged for ludicrous, irrational justifications, over and over, because some whale-police is a fool who can;t recognize value, an their foolish behavior will continue, then I can't keep letting this happen to my important work, and letting the information get suppressed and removed from higher visibility on the trending page.

This information needs to reach more people for the information to be understood, whether its about changing individual live or the world through an understanding of consciousness, truth and morality that constitutes my original main higher quality work, or if its about what is happening on Steemit through posts like the Reddit post or the competition in an information market post.

Truth matters to me, and when it gets suppressed from reaching more people, that is a serious issue to me. Does truth and important information matter to you? Don't you want more people to access it? Then this whale-policing and flagging of content they don't like, don't like who is upvoting that content, while they give false hypocritical justifications, needs to be addressed and corrected.

Is it just me and the fact that @dan/@dantheman used to upvote my content more frequently (but has since stopped doing so recently...)? What about when others get votes from @dan/@dantheman? Is this just a flag war between Steemit whales and bad whales who take it out on content the Steemit whales support? Why can't they recognize value int he content and flag it when it only at $50, or $30? Is this how rewarding informative content is to be done?

@smooth has flagged other content, for whatever reason of it not being good enough to him, not content that attracts new users, or is content he thinks will drive peopel away, etc. I don't know but he just gives the same BS excuse each time of "over rewarded" and "concentrated whales".

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dzEsLdq1o18MjzGeVWn2D8_uSgW-od4YbTj7jkEIbh4/edit?usp=sharing

Some posts might indeed be "over rewarded" for the content value it provides to Steemit. But when something is at $30, and it does provide value, then why is it targeted apart from being content that someone simply doesn't like?

When bad whales act irrationally against the better interests of the platform, then it needs to be addressed. Content creators who do add quality value to the platform to help people's in their lives, or to help the platform become better through issues about the platform and improving, yet are punished for doing so because bad whales lack the comprehension and ability to recognize it's value, then only the community an step in to do something to stop this.

Do you value truth and quality information to help individuals in their lives; or information that can help Steemit improve? Do you want authors to be rewarded for creating such content, whether original or based on some other sources? Then it's time to understand what is happening and how it's harming the platform through certain individual bad behavior. Those of use who do care about these things need to unite to put a stop to this irrational behavior. Or else it will just keep going and demotivate people from creating similar content because they will see what happens when you do (flagged), and that won't attract them to do similar content. That's the point of rewarding quality content that matters in our lives, because it matters and can help people understand things. If you want more useful content to give that reputation and value to Steemit.com, then understand this issue.

Flag away bad whales. Show everyone how you like to suppress information from getting out, like you have been doing, and have done in the past for posts you decide "doesn't provide any value to Steemit" or "causes trouble in the community", when it's actually your behavior that is the problem and is causing trouble, and needs to be addressed by the community which requires them to be made aware of what you're doing. Face the mirror.

---

Thank you for your time and attention! I appreciate this knowledge reaching more people in Steemit because it needs to! Take care. Peace.

---

2017-02-23, 11am