You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steem Voting Subscription Services - Acceptable or Not?
As I have not been as active on our Steem blockchain of late @abitcoinskeptic, I am only now seeing this (due to our recent exchange on your most recent post ...). I have bookmarked it (in SteemPeak, my favorite interface), to come back and read carefully through it, as time permits.
While I have a quick and almost immediate reaction (not typical for me ...), I will refrain until I have properly digested with you have to say, along with the associated comments. Then, I may have more to say later ...
#sbi-skip (<= 😉)
I noticed you write sbi skip on the comments. I post enough that it isn't an issue.
Your comments are better than some people's posts and a vote on some of them wouldn't be embarassing.
I once had sbi vote on a comment that said 'yes'.
My main issue is not with sbi, it is with people that abuse sbi and only vote for sbi. They are the people that stick around here and take take take while complaining that Steem is low. I feel sbi doesn't do enough to prevent this. It wasn't an issue before the hard fork.
Even having “slept on it,” I am still challenged to produce what I would consider a positive, constructive comment to this post @abitcoinskeptic. Just “straight up” from the heart …
If you knew me better, you may well consider me a “contrarian” to the core. Much of which might be attributed to my age and experience in a long life of having “been through the wars” … I am fundamentally unimpressed with most of the “rah, rah, rah” aspects of “New Steem,” when I still see so much blatant abuse of it.
Have the “big boys” truly reformed and made this platform a substantially better place? Or have they simply “changed the rules of the game” and still in the process of madly scrambling to ensure they themselves are in front of the line to take maximum advantage of them? All while “stampeding” the rest to “sing the praises” of “All hail New Steem” with no “off key notes” allowed in the singing. Or else …
For the SBI program to be deemed a worthy “target” for what seems to be a far too zealous (evangelistic?) response to “New Steem” is at least one if not two or three steps too far for this Steemian. When there are far greater issues which need to be addressed. One man’s opinion and it is pointless and a waste of my time to go any further …
While capable of being a considerably larger stakeholder in our Steem blockchain, I have elected not to be, given the much greater negatives I see than most appear to, including apparently yourself. That is fine. We are all uniquely different and cannot possibly be in 100% agreement all the time ...
You do write well @abitcoinskeptic and I am certainly happy to genuinely give you credit for seeming to be considerably more thoughtful in your approach “in here” than most. And, taking pains to not be misunderstood (as much as that depends upon me), I will continue to comment on your posts in the future, as I view that as an essential role we all play in adding value (yes, which is deserving of “rewards” as well …) to the ongoing content creation. Without which the value of the content creation is greatly diminished …
P.S. For what it is worth, I found the most value in reading through all of your post’s comments in those from @felt.buzz and @fionasfavourites. Why? Because they openly question “New Steem” …
#sbi-skip
To be honest I was very reluctant to write this post. Before the changes, SBI was great, although unperfect. Mainly I wish people had to ask for comment votes instead of deny them.
My main reason for writing this post was to alleviate worries of various people I connect with on Steem who are concerned about new Steem going to far. I wanted to assure people it isn't the main target, and to suggest changes SBI can make to survive the purge. Whether the purge has gone to far is a topic hopefully for a dofferent day as that is a discussion that is too early to have.
I haven't changed my downvote habits at all after newSteem. I think I understand what is happening better than most. I still believe it is too early to jump to conclusions on the effects, but I think these measures are worth a try. I definitely think it is too early to see if newSteem has gone to far because as you mentioned, there are larger problems remaining.
Maybe they movement is starting to go astray? That will be worth discussing at some point.
I think my main disagreement with a lot of the people I agree with and respect around here is that it isn't too early to make conclusions, changes weren't necessary, it has already gone to far. I don't think we can answer these. We can debate if it was necessary, but was it detrimental?
I wrote this post to have discussions with people like you and those you mentioned and I am usually sure to pay close attention to people who have differing opinions and write meaningful comments that are worth addressing and replying to.
This is my 3rd or so post on NewSteem that is controversial and not conpletely satire. I want to see everyone stick around. I want to see the changes actually work as intended or close to it (improve value, engagement and userbase). I want to see services like SBI adapt and survive.
I think the most encouraging thing is getting to learn people's insights, and especially the response from Joseph and SBI. He is worried about his project obviously. He knows I'm not the one beating the newSteem drum and trying to attack everyone I disagree with. He agrees a cap on vote bonuses is necessary.
When they suggested how they would make changes, I even wrote I think it is too much and 50% should be considered for the main account posts. I don't think they've been too slow to change, but a few recent events makes me think now is the time to start changing. The closing of smartmarket's selling service and the changes of tipu to allow promotion were two of them.
People like SBI. It is sad to see that some people started abusing it once the bots were under attack. I'm not sure about you, but I feel that something is off when all accounts are voting certain users at 100%. The name basic income evikes something completely different, but I think its time for reasonable limits to prevent abuse.
I've always been in the camp that abusive users are most responsible, then enabling services, and not the normal or legitimate users. I hope that a good solution can be found that increases everyone's peace of mind and Inespecially hope the idea alreadybon the table is enough even though I think it's too much.