RE: Suggestions on how we can improve Steem.
The idea of SteemCleaners is viable. We do need to keep Steem safe. It is the execution and policies I take issues with. Especially #5, which is what I was blacklisted for. Voting for a post or comment of an abuser(who I did not know was an abuser).
From my perspective, I feel as though what happened to me was deplorable. It should not have happened and it certainly could have been handled better. I am left with many unanswered questions. Particularly, why I was suddenly blacklisted after more than 2 months of inactivity! The whole thing struck me as being very strange.
When I visited the SteemCleaners Discord to advocate for myself and appeal my blacklisting I also took some time to go back through their chat. I observed how people were spoken to, how they were treated. In my honest opinion, I found some of it to be unnecessarily abrupt, rude, unprofessional, and culturally insensitive. I am a firm believer in leading by example. Especially, especially in such circumstances.
Circle-Jerks were a bit of a grey area for me too. That is until I took a step back and looked at the bigger picture.
In my opinion, when people vote based on how much profit they can get in return, when they collude with others to get return votes, this is vote farming.
I can dress it up pretty by saying I am just voting for nice people, my friends, and/or people I trust. But, the fact is, if I do that, I am not voting on the quality or content of the actual post. Then, I am voting for people and for profit.
When I look at the bigger picture, what I was doing, using and auto voter, was not helping Steem. I was in a small way contributing to the problem.
If I want to increase the actual value of what is available on Steem, I need to vote based on quality. Yes, granted that will make things more difficult and time-consuming. It will also decrease any earnings I receive under the current system.
The more I look at this and the more I think about this, the more I am convinced that Auto Voters need to go. I know a lot of people are going to hate me for saying that, but I see no other way.
One thing I have to say I do really like is the new flagging beside usernames. I think that this is a good idea. But, it is imperative that the flag is earned. No one should have the power to arbitrarily flag people.
Yes, in the end it is very difficult to implement a system or procedure to prevent and deal with abuse. It certainly requires a lot of forethought. What are the repercussions? What will this promote? In the long term, will this help or harm Steem? Is there a better way?
Thank you for taking the time to read and comment @chekohler. There is certainly a lot to think about here.
You were probably blacklisted a long time ago and just never knew it. It's this new (software) version they just implemented that shows the red (1) next to your name that now makes it into a "scarlet letter".
Marky's pushing for a "grand-unified-master-blacklist" across all the major front-ends.
Details here,
https://steemit.com/sps/@themarkymark/global-blacklist-api-proposal#@themarkymark/q6fmzx
Still, it would have been nice to receive a warning. It would also have been nice to have received a notification when I was blacklisted. This is my reputation we are talking about after all.
I think the flag has the potential to be useful. But, I can't stress enough that it must be earned. It must be justified. It can't just be handed out arbitrarily!
I was not aware that there was/is a global blacklist. I think this is a superb idea.
I really feel like an orientation package should be made available to new users.
Such as: A list of safe apps and services. What is acceptable and what isn't (especially when some things are not obvious, or may not be thought of as something wrong, or are perhaps not logical).
When I first came here I was like a fish out of the water. I found everything difficult to navigate. Not because it was actually difficult, but because there was no guide, or direction.
Thanks for sharing the black-list with me. This is the first time I have heard about it.
@logiczombie
Of course it sounds like a good-idea, but these are just a bunch of self-appointed yahoos who can make exceptions for themselves and their friends at will and enforce their opinions on the rest of us with capricious and tyrannical abandon.
If the blacklists were controlled by the witnesses exclusively, then at least we'd sort of get a "vote", and we could advocate for a transparent appeals process that included some "innocent until proven guilty" procedures along with a standardized "road-to-redemption" for those found "guilty".
Yes, absolutely the rules must apply to everyone equally. Anything else is unacceptable.
Yes, and an innocent until proven guilty would be much more "humane".
Especially if it isn't immediately clear what the "offense" was, or may have been, or what to do about it.
The humiliation of publicly shaming people can't be good for morale. And publicly shaming people who are innocent? Simply unacceptable. It's unacceptable!
@logiczombie