Do Steemians approve of righteoushitting?

in #reputation8 years ago (edited)

The following righteoushitting was causing me to consider leaving Steem(it). I want to know how the community reacts to this? (note edits replacing "stalking and hating" with "righteoushitting" due to comment from @biophil)

I want to ask how Steemians feel about those who stalk the blog posts of people they want to ridicule and hurl false accusations and even ask others to not vote to try to limit the fair rewards that innocent blog author would otherwise receive.

The following comment responses by myself ( @anonymint ) to @sigmajin are extracted from the following blog post:

Who pays for the blogging and curation rewards? (Part 2)

.


https://steemit.com/economics/@sigmajin/a-great-example-of-whats-wrong-with-steemit
whales, read before you upvote this please.
ESY, jason

And so now you use your false accusations to try to influence Steemians to not reward me for my very hard effort. Dude I am a senior level programmer meaning I can earn $75 per hour or more, so if I put days into researching and organizing my understanding and then more hours writing and responding to comments, then it would be nice if Steem is rewarding me for my sincere effort.

I was sleeping while you added these comments to my blog post, and do I don't know how much damage you've done to my potential reward.

.

.


By the way, your math is now correct.

It was always correct, even in Part 1, as I will explain below.

5:95 +349% gain

That is a typo in the table from Part 1. If you had actually taken the time to input the numbers into the equation of Part 1 90 - 5÷r×183÷365 assuming r = 1, then you would have computed:

((((5 + 90 - 2.51) ÷ 200) × 100) - 5) ÷ 5 = 8.249 thus 824.9%

Even if we take r = 0.95 as I incorrectly did in Part 1, then the computation would be:

((((5 + 90 - 2.64) ÷ 200) × 100) - 5) ÷ 5 = 8.236 thus 823.6%

As written in the comments in Part 1, I had been awake about 20 hours when I composed the blog for Part 1, and this had been a whirlwind week of only sleeping a few hours every 24 hours, so I simply made a typo when entering the numbers into the calculator, but my equations were not incorrect.

You didn't even take the time to check the equation and just jumped into making false accusations.

And by extension, Dr. Complexring , and theoretical, and dantheman, all of whose upvotes you explicitly cited as backing your math, they were wrong too. and i was right. just little old me.

You are spoiling the uplifting vibes of community spirit.

.

.


Why are you such a hater? Please don't spam my blog with incessant incoherent walls of text as you did in Part 1. Organize your comments well as @arhag did above. This is supposed to be a community process of uplifting each other, not a dick measuring contest. I tried to be cordial with you in the comments in Part 1, but you went off the rails with false accusations and incoherent arguments.

i think its super shitty to dodge the issue and try to say you were correct all along when your math was clearly in error

Please see my discussion with @arhag above, so you can realize that my math is not incorrect.

now youre posting numbers you came up with using the formula i gave you in the comments. Frankly, its borderline plagarism

Nonsense. I am using the same math that I had in the Part 1 blog. You can see the equation for the more precise model is the same, except I correct the typo from 365 to 364 for the last term, which had nothing to do with the issues you were raising. All I did was clarify the math I already had in Part 1 (and added new sections about other topics).

You continue to make false accusations. Please stop doing that.

And please stop stalking my blogs making false accusations in my past 3 blogs (excepting the silly one I made with a Locomotion video for fun).

Edit. Flagged for failure to cite. incredibly dishonest and its really unfortunate that founders and a top witness support this.

Edit: and so now that I proved in my comment response that you were making false accusations, you further go off the rails and downvote me out of spite even though I had told you I would not downvote your comments because I didn't want to incite a war with you.

Sort:  

I'm tempted to say your post title is a tad disingenuous. "Stalking" and "hate" aren't the words I'd use for @sigmajin's little vendetta. He was so proud of himself for finding an error that he went ballistic over getting you to admit your typo. He ends up coming across as a small man, ungracious and prone to obsessing over minute details.

Basically, @sigmajin fell into the "someone is wrong on the internet" trap, and is to be pitied:

Yeah on more considered thought, I agree.

Hope @sigmajin will accept my apology for employing inexact words.

Note I used 'haters' which is a euphemism or idiomatic meme not for 'hate' but the sort of trolling activity that I am referring to. But still it is less specific than your more accurate characterization of what happened.

I don't know what word accurately describes that famous comic? The word 'vendetta' isn't accurate either.

How about a new word 'righteoushitting'?

Perhaps if there was a private message feature, I could have perhaps defused the situation. But I was in sleep debt, rushed, and stressed, so I couldn't really muster the focus to figure out how to defuse in those public comments. @arhag was very well organized with his comment in my blog.

Btw, it continues, sigh:

https://steemit.com/steem/@anonymint/who-pays-for-the-blogging-and-curation-rewards-part-2#@anonymint/re-sigmajin-re-anonymint-re-sigmajin-re-anonymint-who-pays-for-the-blogging-and-curation-rewards-part-2-20160812t203259261z

@sigmajin:

All the vests in the steem system are compounding at the same rate

There is a relative debasement happening hourly between preexisting SP and newly rewarded SP. You can't capture that without an hourly series. Please do try to go understand what @arhag and I discussing.

Simply stunning.

the best way to deal with Web stalkers is to ignore them. You see that "mute" button? Use it! It's there for a reason!

btw following you, like your write ups; although you may want to be more economical with your sentences and thoughts and tighten up the writing a bit.

This blog post worked. The issue has been amicably resolved. Thanks for the community support. Here is a copy of the latest comment from the affected blog:


unflagged ... so maybe its not a total cut and paste.
we im done with this

Ty. Best to you. I don't hold grudges. You pushed me too far which is why I took the issue more publicized. I am done with this argument also.

When you enter a platform there are some rules that you kind of accept. One of that is that anyone can comment under the article and write short or long answers. This isn't "stalking" - even if someone goes around and follows you in all your threads and do the same. I wouldn't consider it as serious reason to even get upset about, let alone leave.

From what I'm seeing you sorted the issue. But even if you hadn't, most people would say that you give too much importance to something that is not very important. At least from a third-party perspective.

Thanks for the feedback. Appreciated.

When you enter a platform there are some rules that you kind of accept. One of that is that anyone can comment under the article and write short or long answers. This isn't "stalking" - even if someone goes around and follows you in all your threads and do the same.

I think the solution to this is to form like-minded coteries where those who offend your devoted followers are no longer visible. They are still on the blockchain, but the followers have chosen to erase the negativity from their feeds. I have an idea for an algorithm to accomplish this. Fully optional of course and at the discretion of every user how they view the data from the blockchain (a free market with unbounded degrees-of-freedom).

There is no benefit for us to have trolls in our coteries. Constructive criticism yes. Incessant trolling no.

But even if you hadn't, most people would say that you give too much importance to something that is not very important. At least from a third-party perspective.

How is someone stalking and destroying the comment threads in all your blog posts (if it comes to that, which it appeared it was with 3 blog posts of stalking) not very important? At that point, you'd might as well just give up, because everytime you blog post, you know that same stalker is going to come in and berate you. You'd rather go some where else.

From what I'm seeing you sorted the issue.

Yes only because I put my foot down. But I think also because @arhag played the role of mediator to give an excuse to deescalate. And also I should acknowledge that he also became more fair in his assessment. I tried to go easy on him in the first few exchanges in Part 1 and from my perspective he kept escalating. So when it followed me to my next blog and then again to blog Part 2, I escalated it all the way, to make it stop.

At age 51, I don't need that kind of strife and stress in my life. I am trying to cure from a chronic illness and I have enough stress just trying to do my work.

The first line of "downvoting" and "concealing" one's answers is in your mind. You are not forced to take anyone seriously or even read what they write.

If there's too much trolling on threads, and this becomes a serial problem, then the person involved is simply putting at stake his reputation due to fear of multiple downvotes. And if most devoted members see this as a problem, it is kind of certain that he will get them sooner or later. So the problem can already be solved with the downvotes/flagging if the behavior is not right (as it is perceived by most people involved in the thread)

@alexgr, I think a private messaging feature could have helped @sigmajin and I work out our misunderstanding more easily. The problem was when all our discussion was public, it became a reputation content. And it became noisy for readers.

The first line of "downvoting" and "concealing" one's answers is in your mind. You are not forced to take anyone seriously or even read what they write.

Disagree when it impacts our reputation and thus our following and earnings.

Again I think I may have algorithmic idea for a solution. And as in most of my ideas, I don't favor a globalized metric, as that can become censorship.

If there's too much trolling on threads, and this becomes a serial problem, then the person involved is simply putting at stake his reputation due to fear of multiple downvotes.

Not always. Because people are conflicted about creating global censorship wars which drag everyone down into the gutter.

Globalized metrics really don't work because they lack sufficient degrees-of-freedom. And IMO that is precisely what the problem is with Steem as currently designed.

Excellent analysis.Thx!

It is very frustrating, when a trending post has something wrong in it.
However, this argument is not about the post anymore.
Apparently, you have admitted and corrected your mistake.
If it gets abusive, I would flag.
No need to leave STEEMit

I didn't have a mistake in my equations. He is accusing me of plagiarizing his equations.

I only had a typo of when I entered the numbers into my equation on my calculator. He compared the final numbers without checking the equation himself and just decided my equation had to be wrong without actually verifying it. And now he accuses me of plagiarism before, now that I've entered the numbers correctly in the calculator and he sees the result is close to his result from his prior blogs.

Yet even though the blockchain proves my equation didn't change and I didn't change it to copy him, he hasn't withdrawn his false accusations. He is digging his heels in instead.

Also I think it is very likely that I have a facet in my equation which is insightful, which he didn't have in his blogs. It appears he doesn't even know that, because he ostensibly (as evident) never took the time to actually understand my equation. He was just comparing the final numbers and ASS-U-ME-ING.

And more over, in my opinion (and I guess somewhat confirmed by my success) my blogs are written in a coherent style of writing and well organized, so there is nothing wrong or bad with me presenting the information. It is not any where near to a copy of his prior blogs. I had never read his blogs (and even now I haven't, just skimmed them after he linked me to them in the comments of Part 1). Any one who knows me or has studied well my post activity, will see I do original work. I hate to copy others, or at least provide significant innovation and additional insight when I do build off someone else's work (and of course cite the prior art as I did in Part 1 where I cited @arhag and in Part 2 I cited @sigmajin).

What bothers me the most is he is making huge walls of text in the comments which (require me to respond in kind to refute and) make it difficult to find any of the other discussions. It is not etiquette and disrespectful of the others who comment. I didn't bring it the community after he did it Part 1. But now I can see he is going to do it in Part 2 blog as well, so I decided to take the issue to the community vote and feedback.

And he even stalked me to an unrelated blog I made and made some more false accusations there in the comments.

I don't want to be part of a community which is just spamming dick size contests. I want to be part of a community that tries to focus on getting positive accomplishments.

I don't want to be part of a community which is just spamming dick size contests. I want to be part of a community that tries to focus on getting positive accomplishments.

I don't consider your clickbait title and public whining a 'positive accomplishment', sorry.
Your statistics were insightful and constructive- that's why i followed you.
And now you get more votes and payout in 30 minutes for comlaining about a hater than i got for my whole blog.
I'm not going to engage in this.
Peace

How is asking the community whether it condones a stalking and hating clickbait? My blog is exactly about what the title asks. I am documenting a prime example of it and asking for the community to tell me whether we care or not.

If this site will become a crab mentality of pulling each other back down instead of lifting each other up, then I will not stay here.

I will instead go make competitor to Steem that is better. I am contemplating doing that, if things go downhill on Steem.

I have some ideas about how to improve the algorithms (and some way to squelch crab mentality). I am considering offering my ideas to Steem. I am in the process of analyzing my next move. That is one of the reasons I am writing these very technical blogs.

I am a blockchain developer.

I don't whine. I win. And I win for the betterment of everyone, not just for myself.

I am seriously in a very deep reflection mode right now trying to decide if I would like to become a developer for Steem or go create my own competitor project. I am trying to rush my analysis because I was supposed to call @ned this past weekend about this.

Another point of bringing this to the community is to show those haters and stalkers that there are repercussions that the author can take to shine a spotlight when the transgressions before far too extreme, which I think is accurate in this case. Again I didn't not bring this to the community in Part 1 even though the false accusations and walls of extremely long text were already extreme in the comments of my Part 1 blog.

Peace also bro.

EDIT: let me add that I am all for humor and laughing off these matters. I made a serious reaction, because I want to know how the community feels about the importance of squelching crab mentality (where we have to pull each other down because we don't want anyone to have more success than we did). His blogs didn't do well, because he doesn't write as coherently as I do. It is his fault, not the community's fault.

I don't consider your clickbait title and public whining a 'positive accomplishment', sorry.

This blog is a small tangent to give me some data I need to help assist me in my thought process. The positive achievement is what comes from that thought process and also the feedback it gives to haters and stalkers that they can be DOXXed if they push it too far to extreme levels of trolling.

What we can say is that this is a learning experience for me of the value of interacting and hopefully also for others. And my learning process is valuable, and probably not only to myself but to a larger community. For example, I may learn that this is a very low value activity and that includes making very technical blog posts. So I may realize to keep my mouth shut and spend my time programming instead. That could end up being a very positive achievement and not just for myself.

@felixxx, haha yeah. Thx for the feedback and good perspective on the low value of escalating. I do understand. The goal is to find a way to not have those situations get the best of us in the first place. Again per my reply to @alexgr , I am hoping for some algorithmic way to limit the reach of trolling and make it so we can just laugh it off.

P.S. I have been working 120 hours a week, so my state-of-mind is probably a bit stressed.

EDIT: I think this is a good education for myself in that I need to understand that I can't handle so many works at the same time. It is too much for one person to handle. So if this situation, I think I need a design that allows me to moderate my comments for my followers, if they give me that role. But normally I hate censorship, so I'd prefer an algorithmic solution that operates impartially to my personal whims. I have an idea for such.

also the feedback it gives to haters and stalkers that they can be DOXXed if they push it too far to extreme levels of trolling.

And now you get more votes and payout in 30 minutes for comlaining about a hater than i got for my whole blog.

I want to fix this. I have an idea of how to make a meritocracy. I think you all are going to like my idea. Stay tuned...

I have an idea:
you find it on my blog.

it starts with upvoting good comments.
And then reading what others have to say on their blog.

I have an idea:
you find it on my blog.

I will read after I catch up with @arhag's deep mathematical comments.

Btw, just want you all to know it is Friday. I was just informed that it isn't Tuesday. In my mind, Sunday was just 2 or 3 days ago.

I haven't had time to look at the clock at the lower right side of my computer. Sometimes I resist going to urinate because don't have time for that either. I can't remember when I last showered.

This has been a crazy period ever since I joined Steem(it) I think perhaps I've averaged only 4 - 5 hours sleep per day and something like 120 hours of work per week.

Take a leak and chill out dude :)

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.36
TRX 0.12
JST 0.039
BTC 70112.96
ETH 3549.99
USDT 1.00
SBD 4.71