RE: Steemcleaners Report for 22 September, 2019

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Steemcleaners Report for 22 September, 2019

in steemcleaners •  2 months ago 

Why are you complaining?
You (@steemcleaners) are still Top Author By Payout.

I don't like your business model with downvotes, nothing personal against you and @themarkymark. Downvotes are bad for Steem. I hope you can see it now.

Steem cannot attract relevant authors, brands, companies because they risk being attacked by some random whale in a bad mood.

Imagine Twitter or Facebook with downvotes.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  
Loading...

What your flagging is going to cause is that we will just stop working. This work contributes to pay of my bills. I'm not going to sit around 20 hours per week working for free for the project that is trying to improve social platform that has zero appreciation for our work.
How that's going to end up is that we will cease the work as there is no point.

Anyone that has ever attacked or criticized us has tried to exploit Steemit in one way or another. I don't recall any criticism from anyone who tried to use Steemit in honest and considerate way.

He thinks he's #NewSteem, when he was one of the biggest supporters of the problems we tried to combat. The times when nobody wanted to downvote bad stuff because it "costed them upvotes".

Like a moron, @anthonyadavisii tried to use @steemflagrewards to incentive a little bit of care into the platform when he should have just left and stopped giving a fuck.

boosta.png

small pusher.png

freepress.png

Where was @boosta when we needed help? Where was @boosta when we could have used help against whales? Nowhere to be found.

He was too busy sponsoring the very people who were exploiting the platform via bots, etc. As if the other bad whales weren't enough. He enabled a shit ton of asshats to do the same.

And here he is... #NewSteem! Talk about #fakeSteem and #oldSteem bullshit.

At least you are somewhat compensated, @logic. Others haven't even gotten 1% of your wage for doing what you do.

How about the whale he downvoted for a while? Still doing the same thing. Except, he managed to alienate everyone who might have shared similar sentiments.

I'm this close to be done with this platform. @guiltyparties and @anthonyadavisii managed to get me stay last time, but I'm just so sick of being underappreciated for all the shit being flung at us.

Everyone always expect us to do much more with the SP we have, but they don't ever seem to want to pitch in a dime for our effort. Then, they bitch about it when there are some people who wanted to support us.

I am almost done with this platform myself.
I left once for 6 months in the end of 2016.

Not everyone believes what you do is good. Steemcleaners go after "spam" posts, while it spams comments all day and enjoys lucrative upvote rewards. It is a hyporitical project and I don't mind if you do quit. I side with @boosta.

It's private funding not from Delegation from Steemit Inc. Delegation from Steemit Inc has never been used for a single upvote.

If you want to go after lucrative projects that exploit community and Steemit Inc delegation to curate they own circle of buddies, go after Steem Hunt.


Sure, we can ignore reports for copypasta spam and so decrease the number of comments per day.
Then we will increase funding on comments from 9.5% upvote to 100% per comment, only limiting to commenting plagiarism, identity deception/theft and scams.
Actually that would dramatically decrease amount of work too as we do every comment manually but we would still receive the same remuneration for our work.

How about that?

By their own logic, shouldn't @steemcleaners DECLINE ALL PAYOUTS?

Aren't they, themselves "stealing from all the poor insightful original content creators" by sucking up such a large portion of the rewards pool?

In an ideal scenario, given the current set up:

  1. It would make sense for @steemcleaners to have a funding proposal through the SPS. Whether or not stakeholders would support it is another story.

  2. An easier solution is for private donors such as @adm to transfer liquid STEEM/SBD to them for expenses. Unfortunately, @adm is controlled by multiple entities, so it is unlikely that could happen.

  3. A drastic solution is for a dedicated budget from annual inflation to anti-abuse efforts, but that would greatly centralize such initiatives. You'd need to introduce some sort of governance and whatnot or it will become problematic.

There are defintely other arragements that could work, but those are some examples.

It's never possible to expect people to do things for free for an extended period of time. So, the idea that they should have no funding is ridiculous.

Here's the problem.

Ostensibly, the whole point of @steemcleaners is to "protect the reward pool", and yet, they themselves are "taking a very large slice of the reward pool" (consistently ranked in the top 5 steem-money-makers) as their "payment" for "protecting the reward pool".

Are they really "protecting the reward pool"?

Or are they simply EATING the reward pool?

Look, if you want to flag POSSIBLE plagiarism with the cheetahbot, that already provides a link to the imagined "original source", doesn't that, just by itself SOLVE the "problem" of "unattributed posts"?

Going in and downvoting is just a complete waste of effort at that point. It would make way more sense to locate all of this "insightful original content" you're all so excited about "protecting" and UPVOTE that!!

Or, and I say this politely because we have had polite interactions before... We could just let Proof of Brain do its thing.

If enough individuals dislike something they can cumulatively make an impact. The social consensus that enough people just randomly all hate something and want it demoted is a great tool. However, organizing can be dangerous as it can always lead to biased favoritism and hypocritical rule structures.

In essence, what has taken place is hypocritical rules. No one else can fund themselves from repetitive copypasta comments..., except for us. That is similar to how the government/financial system works. The banks can do fractional reserve banking, but you can't. If you do that you're a fraudster, but if they do it its for the common good. The unfairness/corruption is always justified as a systemic necessity.

If Steem is to be something better than the old dominion then it needs to stick to the principles of letting the crowd, in an unorganized, decentralized way decide the fate of certain behavior.

Short -form:

@%& the pooolice!

  ·  2 months ago Reveal Comment

If I am reading your comment correctly, I would love that and I would support you guys for doing that. I am opposed to plagarism, identity deception/theft and scams, what I have a problem with is going after people that repeat themselves for the sake of exposure. I simply see nothing wrong with that and believe that Steem, as a decentralized blogging platform should allow that stuff to exist. If a blogger hates spam comments on their personal blog they should flag it themselves. We don't need an internet police force for that kind of thing.

  ·  2 months ago (edited)

Vast majority of users are not capable of recognizing that such comments are spam. They are completely clueless and/or don't do basic due diligence by checking someone's blog. You realize that when you see them responding to these spam comments thinking that they are honest and crafted just for them showing real interest in what they post.
These spam comments are manufactared to fish for potential votes from such oblivious users.


The problem is that spam posts simply spam the Blockchain.
More importantly, it drowns the visibility of posts created by decent content creators.
Would you like your post that you put effort in creating quickly disappearing and becoming invisible because of it being pushed away and drowned between mass of spam posts?

Sadly, majority of posts published each day are some sort of abuse like plagiarism, copypasta and/or spam attempting to farm/fish on curated and/or popular tags.

Also, these posts seldom have "decline payout" option selected, meaning that they are attempt to fish for random vote.

How does it bring value to Steemit and recognition from outside, if any new outsider who tries to check up what Steemit is about just see trash, spam and exploitation posts everywhere?

Vast majority of users are not capable of recognizing that such comments are spam.

That sounds like it is not a problem then. If the author of the post does not have a problem with the comment on their post, I see no reason we need a third party to act as an authoritarian on the issue.

The problem is that spam posts simply spam the Blockchain.

That was dealt with by RCs. Again, you are creating an authoritarian state on a supposedly decentralized protocol and making rules for users that you do not follow in your own operations. RCs were meant to manage spam, creating a cost per action. If a person is willing to cover the cost by investing enough in the network they have purchased their right to said actions.

You are forcing your own ideologies about what should or should not exist on a protocol that is suppose to be about freedom of action and expression. This is why the Steem experiment has revealed that unlimited stake weight is a bad idea. Unlimited influence over the network by a single entity leads to centralization and authoritarianism.

I thought, perhaps mistakenly, that your earlier comment was suggesting you would be relieved to not have to bother with "spam" comments. It now seems that it was a bluff because you assumed I cared that you did that job... I don't. However, I support you in hunting down scams and obvious and proven plagiarists. (read: not just people that don't check in with you, which happened to @jsecoin's original content)

Is the steemit userbase growing now?

Let's rage quit together.

It is #RagequitFriday again according to @whatsup.

It's unfortunate that @boosta is so fixated on one thing that he doesn't like that he completely disregards the good that we do for the chain. In other words, he "can't see the forest for the trees".

On the other, I appreciate the work you do @enforcer48 and all the SFR peeps behind the scenes much of which has not been acknowledged by decisive stakeholders.

Let's not lose heart just yet, I'll be putting in more time to hopefully draft a compelling proposal with specific deliverables from SFR in addition to the previous stuff from the brainstorming.

Perhaps, @boosta just doesn't understand the work being done behind the scenes. We are open door on the server so he is welcome to stop by and make suggestions.

I'll work on polishing up a proposal and I also have been working on the server setup. Just spun up a new virtual machine this morning so let's see where it goes.

I really hate that I couldn't get my OS on the SSD but will make do.

Either way, we'll be fine.

  ·  2 months ago (edited)

I'm just waiting for more nukes on SC to come and rewards going to nothing.
I'd like to see what happens to Steemit when we stop investigating and shut down our work. When it drowns in the spam and abuse and Steem being mass dumped by scammers/spammers/abusers on exchanges. I wonder they would degrade Steem to 1 cent:-)

I would be very sad if you peeps leave :'(

I will watch over you with my tribe accounts.

Is the steemit userbase growing now?

Don’t really use Steemit. Prefer SteemPeak.

Is the steempeak userbase growing now?

You'd have to ask the team that's behind @steempeak.

Yes i was actually just looking at that and every single week for the last 60 weeks or so more people visit our site. It's a very gentle but steady uptrend. @logiczombie

Would you say that the last hard-fork really changed the tide?

  ·  2 months ago Reveal Comment
  ·  2 months ago Reveal Comment

Wow!!!!

Is the steemit userbase growing now?

I think the total number of accounts is still going up slightly but I think the number of actual users went dowm some.

Steem cannot attract relevant authors, brands, companies because they risk being attacked by some random whale in a bad mood.

Then don’t be a bad whale? Why are you making other people be accountable for your actions?

Imagine Twitter or Facebook with downvotes

But they do have ban. Just like how a parody account on Twitter got banned for making fun of @rogerkver. The charge? Impersonation. How bloody ridiculous was that?

Dude your point is so fucking valid... Shit dude... Maybe that's why steem is fucking 0.12 cents now... They killed it

coming from the random whale in a bad mood maliciously flagging.

I flag people for spam, plagiarism, fraud, not because I don't like them or their opinion. Bad flags are bad for steem.

Who are you to decide what is spam, fraud...? Superman? Some people are not that perfect as you and maybe wrong in judging what's right and what's not. There will always be debate over bad flags. There must be a better solution than argue who is right.

Who are you to decide who to upvote? Who put you in charge to decide who should get rewards? Same problem just in reverse.

Everyone one here should be flagging content that should not receive rewards. It is the only way we can prevent steem becoming $0. Yet there are always people like you that use flags as a weapon to harass and troll people rather than what is good for the platform.

I generally only flag the worse cases of abuse. It’s my right as a stake holder. I don’t flag people willy nilly, I flag people posting 50+ times a day, plagiarizing images and text, and copying other people’s work. I flag really bad cases of reward disagreement but I generally don’t do much in that department as it is very subjective but what I do flag is clearly shit content.

You want to chat about it, hit me up on steemchat or discord. Without flags we will have people shit posting 10 times a day with no one challenging it. There will be zero distribution and just account preservation posts like many did in hf20 and earlier.

There is a vast difference between my flags and yours and Haejins.

It isn't really for anyone to tell another what they should flag though. Boosta bought his SP and it comes with an upvote and a downvote. Its a matter of personal preference, I wish the downvote button didn't exist, but it does so that means we all have the right to do what we want with it.

Is the steemit userbase growing now?

No

Is there some active discussion on how to attract new users?

And if there is, can you provide a link for me?

This seems like it should be priority A number 1!

There are many discussions on it. Most are in private channels, dms, and discord. There are many on chain as well.

Who are you to decide what is spam, fraud...?

Didn’t know there’s a subjective line for fraud and plagiarism. Care to elaborate on that? By your logic, maybe Bitconnect was legit all this time.

Please don’t use businesses as an excuse for why flags are bad.

Until I see @steemmonsters and @nTopaz get flagged into oblivion, I don’t buy that rhetoric. Most people don’t start shit with legitimate businesses. Nobody in their right mind would put their large stake as collateral damage in a “bad mood” against a business.

Go talk to people on Whaleshares, who got rid of flags on their platform, see how their token tanked to almost nothing as the whales went mass farming and dumping.

Couldn't agree more. So what do you @boosta suggest as a way forward from this bad flag debate?

This is interesting point. More I read about this more I understand entire view on post voting.