Day 3 of being flagged by BernieSanders
Steemit was important to me. I bought my stake with my own hard earned cash. I placed my trust in the dream of Steem. That trust has been broken it seems. A stakeholder on this platform doesn't want me to be a part of this community anymore.
Why? I don't think it's a personal thing he has against me. I think he just doesn't like Steemit.
Whatever his reasons, he has chosen to drive away @skeptic, @matrixdweller, @krnel and now @fyrstikken. In standing up for a friend, now I've become an obstacle in the way of his personal ambition. Another expendable human being in the pursuit of what? I hope it is worthwile for him.
It is a painful for thing for me. I invested in Steem and Steemit. I'm 50 plus years old now, building a completely new life for myself after arriving in the U.S. with a suitcase in 2011. Cryptocurrency investments are a way for me to leverage my money and secure a future for myself.
I'm not overly reckless with my money. I came to Steemit to research my investment. I liked what I saw. I waited for the price to bottom and started buying my stake. It was a stake that contained the hope of future security. I brighter future for myself.
So as I reflect today on my vulnerability and expendability in this community, I am mourning those hopes and dreams a little. The emotion and energy I put into curating, developing networks of friends, encouraging others to find a place on the platform, welcoming new users, all feels for nought today.
It's just a feeling though. I will pick myself up, as I have always done and move with determination to the next plan. A small part of me would like to believe that my old dream remains. When will I let go? Not today. I'll keep a little glimmer alive today.
This is the problem with an oligarchical platform... the inequitable dispensation of power. A couple of months ago I predicted that this is what will bring Steemit down in the long run. I pray that everything gets right sometime soon (but not optimistic). I miss your comments on my stories! Good luck!!!
Thanks Rich. Yeah, I've been involving myself in other ventures on the platform and contemplating how to deal with intractable problems like I'm experiencing now. I share your view in this being the obstacle to progress. If it doesn't go away, I don't see a future for a Steemit blogging platform, at least.
I'm surprised that Steemit itself does nothing. Do they even care? I can't quite fathom the unwillingness to lead the project with strength.
I'll pop on over to your blog and and reacquaint myself with your writing. :-)
Thanks my friend...I miss your input!
@berniesanders is just an asshole hillbilly small-minded bullshit!
It makes me very sad to read a post like this. I started here about 60 days ago, and this seemed like a place full of promise... but there are seriously some cracks in the foundation here.
I still believe in Steemit, but have some reluctance in recommending it to others... too much personal infighting, it seems, and not enough just getting on with creating great content and building an amazing platform for the future.
This is an amazing work. How is it done?
I use the Xaos software to randomly generate the fractals. It is my way of using art to attract the readers eye, without having to concern myself with licencing of the pictures.
The mathematics that generates a fractal fascinates me.
Not only a stakeholder that doesn't want certain people a part of this community, this also reflects the developers and and Steemit, Inc because they allow this to happen. Not only driving those you mentioned away, myself and others including a co-founder...SMH.
At least there's still the ability to do trading with STEEM and SBD to earn more rather than creating content for large stakeholders on a the social media part of it to earn more through curation rewards and self-voting themselves and their friends. They can circle jerk themselves till they realized everyone is gone.
That sucks, it's not nice to be picked on.
That said, I think your statements are too far reaching. So what if @berniesanders flags you? That's their prerogative. It's not the first time whale flagging has come up in recent months as I know you know!
I think you're mistaken about some implicit contract of trust. What was it that you expected which is now "broken"? This is a serious question, not rhetorical.
All of your investment is still intact. All that you have experienced is a short period of decreased rewards and personal affront. The dream is still alive, if it is realistic.
I associated 'Steemit' with Steemit website and a blogging platform. The stakeholders are invested in Steem network, which is distinct from the Steemit blogging platform. Many of the larger stakeholders are not interested in Steemit as a blogging platform at all, so they don't care what happens to this platform.
The largest stakeholder of 'Steemit', which one might assume is the stakeholder that would support Steemit the blogging platform does not act in a way that supports Steemit. It acts in ways that support the Steem network, which is, as I've said earlier, distinct from Steemit.
When someone on the Steemit blogging platform might expect a Steemit stakeholder to protect their investment of time and energy in the Steemit blogging platform, we get crickets from Steemit. No response.
This is a network where stakeholders act in their own interest. Implicit in the inaction of the Steemit account is that it is not supportive of the Steemit blogging platform.
Effectively that tells me that Steemit as a blogging platform is probably not worth investing my time in until a stakeholder emerges that is supportive of users of the Steemit platform. Until that time, we are at the mercy of those invested in other use cases of the Steem blockchain. For example, berniesanders, who has publicly declared his disgust with Steemit.
I'm not totally clear on what you're saying, beyond the facts you're presenting.
What are you suggesting that the @steemit account (I think that's the account you're referring to) should do to support the Steemit blogging platform? I have to assume you mean countering flags from @berniesanders or some similar defensive action, perhaps up to supporting a code change?
Self interest is indeed the guiding principle of Steem and therefore Steemit, and if it is not working out the rules need to be tweaked, as they have many times so far. In my opinion we're still in need some of important, fundamental tweaks, as I've talked about before in comments and posts.
I think the platform is worth investing your time in, but as all investments, only what you can afford to lose.
I think there will always be a @berniesanders type character and that a code change is the best way to reduce their negative impact. I do not deny that people like this have a negative impact, but it does little good to berate them (they thrive on that) or lament the platform. I've seen so many people getting fed up and writing an eloquent post about why they're dissatisfied, and sometimes throwing in the towel. What effect does this really have?
I've said it before and I guess I'll say it again, but complaining has limited value for change, and has negative value for new user adoption and retention. If you want to see a stakeholder emerge that better suits your vision of the platform, decrying the state of things will not aid this in any way. Time and time again, these posts are self-defeating.
I'm not saying STFU complainers, I'm saying don't expect much from the complaints.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
This journal is not a complaint. It is a daily record.
And thanks for yours, complaint or not.
It's a fundamental assumption of not just Steem but all blockchains that the honest majority will police any malicious minority. You can't 'change the rules' to remove that element, it's always going to be there. The major stakeholders will have to act in some way, or their investment will depreciate.
In order for Steem to work, it's not just that the rules have to be right, but that the major stakeholders must recognise their role in making it work. (This is true in Bitcoin etc. as well). It's very similar to democracy and other forms of government. You can place the rules on a populace, but it requires a populace that understands how they can make it work, and want to make it work, the rules being in place is not sufficient for the system to work.
But that is at the miner (or witness) level. I guess @dan and co. were inspired by the same logic, and what we have in the voting system is similar, but it's not quite the same thing.
You can't change some rules without losing something fundamental but you certainly can change others. For example, I've suggested that the relative difference in voting power between those with the most SP and the least. Changing the square reward curve to almost linear has been suggested as a way to do this. This is changing the rules while keeping it attractive for investors. At least that's the idea.
I don't agree. Blockchains do not rely on civic duty, they rely on engineering a situation where desirable action is rewarded, and undesirable behavior is made very expensive. This needs to be done by fundamental design, not an appeal to morality.
Bitcoin is markedly simpler in this aspect. The social network aspect of Steem is really a "meta" network on the blockchain and complicates matters, hence your conflation of newly mined Steem distribution voting (voting on posts) and general blockchain consensus building (the so-called honest majority). It's a really hard problem to solve lining up the goals of the social network with the blockchain, and I think that it's an admirable stab at it so far.
One thing though, if people do not understand this and other fundamental concepts, we get FUD in many posts, like this one. In every case it is down to not accepting the freedom of other actors on the platform - every single case. I say see the platform as it is, clearly, and change the things that aren't working, carefully. I think that is more a failing of Steemit.com than anything else. The blockchain continues on unconcerned.
It's not an appeal to civic duty, but merely that large stakeholders need to recognize where their interests actually lie and act upon them. There are all sorts of ways that people can fail to see or act in their own interest. Short-term thinking, laziness, fear, apprehension, ignorance and even sometimes purely self-destructive behaviour are common ways that people can fail to act in their own interest.
I agree with this proposal, but it won't change the need for larger stakeholders to police smaller ones. No rule change will remove that element, although they can make the act of policing easier. There will always be ways for a large stakeholder to be selfish or abusive at the cost of the network as a whole and it requires that those who are heavily invested police such behaviour.
I never invested much in the Steemit community, because success in the Steemit community isn't based on quality. It's based on manipulating other human beings, many of whom are stupid, vindictive, and unphilosophical. It's possible to do this, by predicting what will appeal to the "lowest common denominator" (of "libertarians"/"agorists" or otherwise), but it's not fun for anyone who is intellectually advanced in the area they're writing about. Alleged libertarians are barely different from mainstream Democrats and Republicans in this regard. (Moreover, unless you have an operationally secure computer and an an anonymous internet connection, you are simply saving up digital currencies for government agents like Carl Mark Force.)
That's my < .02
Thank you for posting @seablue.
It sounds like you have what it takes to 'Tough it out'......as it were.
Keep Steeming. Cheers.
I think you should stick around and let them move on to next unlucky person. In a matter of time they will move on and your dream may come true.
It might work out like that.
I would feel bad for the next person and be more involved in supporting them We are all so vulnerable in this current system. How can we feel secure? Without security, why invest?
I've been flagged by a handful of people myself. It made me mad also. I worked so hard on a few post that I thought were good and would make me some Steem. And wanting to go to there page and flag them. But I held out and let them see that I was not worried about them. Sure I get flags every now and then. But I have faith in Steem and I keep Steeming on!
This post has been ranked within the top 10 most undervalued posts in the second half of Apr 08. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $0.74 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Apr 08 - Part II. 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.