I have not read the terms of service on hive.
My guess would be that they are exactly the same as here.
That being the case you may be able show that he is fact in violation of the terms of service and appeal to have those terms of service enforced. There is clearly mechanisms on both platforms to prevent certain accouts from flagging. As an example the joe.public account is unable to flag the murky mark on the Steem blockchain.
If you went down that road, you would probably need to demonstrate having clean hands, so to speak.
yeah....er no....
I've never appealed to authority before for doing what I'm doing, I'm not starting now...
Maybe by bringing things to light in my own,way, will let others do the bureaucracy required to stop the cancer.
I've never appealed to authority before for doing what I'm doing, I'm not starting now...
I would see it more as gaining consensus by building a case against his accounts. He runs a lot of very small accounts on Steem I have not done much poking around on hive as yet.
If you started flagging accounts he votes for, there is a big chance that it would backfire on you in a very bad way.
I am happy to help you bring things to light but not flagging other accounts to do it. I know first hand how the chain of command works here and how extensive it is.
Ahhhhh....you're trying to work out my my cunning plan......lol.
My theory is that there always more good people than bad.
Which would you prefer....
a) to be part of something that promotes freedom and free speech?
b) to be complicit in a user's nefarious ways?
Option 'a' gives you the same value added to your account as an up vote received from slime.
If you started flagging accounts he votes for, there is a big chance that it would backfire on you in a very bad way.
....not necessarily ( see no loss of vote value above)
People with sound ethics would not mind the disruption and messy comments section (for a short time), if it meant that this issue was brought to the attention of others (imo).
It would highlight malicious actors on the platform.
It would be of no loss , value wise, to the account being up voted for by wither.
(and the upvote value would be passed on by the account holder to me. i.e the malicious down voter would be adding to the pool of resources to combat him..)
There are a lot more good players than bad, to counter the abuse.
(this isn't about me, btw. I will continue to do it once he stops on my account and goes to another.)
It might lead to the option of declining rewards from an upvote from any specific account...imagine that..no curation rewards for malicious players.
That changes things...
Maybe it would be better just to attack his alt account?
I have a cunning plan.....
Are you going to share it with me?
I would if it was properly formulated....still ironing out some wrinkles...lol
I have not read the terms of service on hive.
My guess would be that they are exactly the same as here.
That being the case you may be able show that he is fact in violation of the terms of service and appeal to have those terms of service enforced. There is clearly mechanisms on both platforms to prevent certain accouts from flagging. As an example the joe.public account is unable to flag the murky mark on the Steem blockchain.
If you went down that road, you would probably need to demonstrate having clean hands, so to speak.
yeah....er no....
I've never appealed to authority before for doing what I'm doing, I'm not starting now...
Maybe by bringing things to light in my own,way, will let others do the bureaucracy required to stop the cancer.
I would see it more as gaining consensus by building a case against his accounts. He runs a lot of very small accounts on Steem I have not done much poking around on hive as yet.
If you started flagging accounts he votes for, there is a big chance that it would backfire on you in a very bad way.
I am happy to help you bring things to light but not flagging other accounts to do it. I know first hand how the chain of command works here and how extensive it is.
Ahhhhh....you're trying to work out my my cunning plan......lol.
My theory is that there always more good people than bad.
Which would you prefer....
a) to be part of something that promotes freedom and free speech?
b) to be complicit in a user's nefarious ways?
Option 'a' gives you the same value added to your account as an up vote received from slime.
....not necessarily ( see no loss of vote value above)
People with sound ethics would not mind the disruption and messy comments section (for a short time), if it meant that this issue was brought to the attention of others (imo).
It would highlight malicious actors on the platform.
It would be of no loss , value wise, to the account being up voted for by wither.
(and the upvote value would be passed on by the account holder to me. i.e the malicious down voter would be adding to the pool of resources to combat him..)
There are a lot more good players than bad, to counter the abuse.
(this isn't about me, btw. I will continue to do it once he stops on my account and goes to another.)
It might lead to the option of declining rewards from an upvote from any specific account...imagine that..no curation rewards for malicious players.
That changes things...
I'm still ironing out wrinkles! lol.....