You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steemcleaners Report for 22 September, 2019
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:
It would make sense for @steemcleaners to have a funding proposal through the SPS. Whether or not stakeholders would support it is another story.
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.
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!!
Is it though? It's not uncommon that people find content that's plagiarized and received payout through unaware voters and/or promotions.
Part of @steemcleaners agreement with STINC is that they can't use that stake to upvote. I mean, you can't argue against the lender who set those terms.
Remember, most people with decent stake don't want to curate. It's easier to be content agnostic. Posts, or "content", as most call it are nothing more than placeholders for "proof of click" mining.
Who's the victim here?
I've been flagged multiple times for re-posting my OWN content from other forums and websites (I am now 100% in compliance after being threatened with downvotes). In the discord channel (kangaroo-court), I saw many other new steemians were complaining about the exact same thing.
I don't give a rip if someone likes what I have to say and re-posts it.
Re-posting does no harm to the original author.
If you want your words protected, then it is your responsibility to register them with the copyright office and it is then your responsibility to hunt down violators of your registered copyright and report them to the legal authorities.
The central conceit of @steemcleaners is that "simply because we can find something similar with a quick google search, this DOES NOT mean that the google search has revealed the ORIGINAL AUTHOR and it furthermore does not mean that the text discovered in the quick google search is protected by any sort of registered copyright.
If you want to enforce "attribution", then the cheetahbot already does that in a polite manner.
No downvote required.
Every paid out reward devalues your stake. If they are going towards plagiarism, I can't imagine the value going up soon.
https://steempeak.com/@shadesofblack
This is just one of many examples people thought a legitimate group is on Steem, but turned out they weren't.
Do you think the group was happy to be on Steem then? Fuck no. Steem is just some shady den of thieves to the outside world.
That's pointless. Whaleshares did exactly that, even got rid of flags, guess where their token went? Worth almost nothing. People stop creating when they realize posts are just placeholders for votes; hence "account preservation posts".
If you think many of us here have not been observing how different forks of Steem played out, you are sadly mistaken.
Hmmm, if that's the case, why isn't their voting power at 100%?
Check their downvote power. It's at 5%.
When you go below that, it starts to use your normal VP under HF 21/22.
If you are talking about the rando upvote. That probably shouldn't have happened. But, that's their internal affair. Not ours.
Ok, thanks for the explanation!
What do you think about a bid-bot being @steemcleaners 2nd highest upvote supporter?
I'm pretty sure that's a "curation sniper".
Many people vote early on SC posts because they know @adm will upvote it eventually, which yields curation greater than their vote value.
Since the HF21, bots have been doing some "manual" curating or change their algorithm to cover the loss of sales.
#abuse @steemflagrewards
Just because some account is on some top list, does not mean that it is automatically a lucrative account. The amount of reward that SC receives daily from the pool is super tiny. Do the basic math. It is all in our wallet. transparent. Check up how much we collect each week. Large part of payments that we distribute comes from our own power downed STEEM.
The funding received by SC from private entities is for a project that is beneficial and important to integrity and future of Steemit. Despite it receiving zero appreciation, understanding and support from Steemit Inc.
No one is going to work for free on Steemit anymore as enforecer48 explained.
SPS has not even begun properly yet. And from the information that I have been given by some top witnesses, the chance of us getting any funding from it is none. Considering that even chanced for these witnesses to get funding for their project is next to none (as they explained). To be honest, all that SPS sounds to me like it's just wishful thinking.
I'm getting my info from "Top Authors By Payout (30 days)" here, https://usesteem.com/steemwhales/topauthors
If you have a better source, I'd love to see it.
In point 1 and 2 you claim that SC barely makes any steem-money (reward pool) and then in point 3 you say "no one is going to work for free"? Which is it? Does SC barely make any steem-money or are they working for virtual peanuts?
What the heck is SPS?
The sentence seemed self explanatory. It is obviously figure of speech.
No one is going to work for free.
SC is taking a tiny fraction of pool each day.
Weekly reward after conversion to USD is currently low, due to low price of Steem.
If it is further reduced by flags on SC posts, it will go even lower giving reward to workers that is not worth the work. No one is going to work so much for so little reward unless their lifestyle circumstances make them desperate.
What sentence? This one?
Have you ever heard of wikipedia? Do you think the average user gets paid to post on reddit?
SC is taking a MUCH LARGER piece of the reward-pool than 99.99999% of so called "abusers".
No kidding. That's because steemit is dying because it doesn't have a functioning economy.
Right, that's why we need to be reaching out to places like Venezuela, India, and the African and Middle Eastern nations.
People will work for virtual peanuts. Just like they already do here, at Amazon's Mechanical Turk
Please read Steemit's FAQ, section about spam and plagiarism.
Also please read our articles' collection in "informationalarticles" channel in our Discord.
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!
It's been getting better though. Various tribes, or communities, that use SCOTs (side chain tokens on Steem) have been moderating themselves.
Unfortunately, where stake is king, whales decide the trend and can often go unchallenged.
Well, I guess the main problem is the rewards. Most are not here for the "decentralized", "censorship resistant", etc, aspects. Hence why many still believe they are being censored despite all their data is still on the chain.
Although, I won't disagree with having issues with being demonetized because some dude(s) don't like you.
#abuse @steemflagrewards
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.
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?
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.
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)
No idea what you are talking about.
Please read Steemit's FAQ, section about spam and plagiarism.
Also please read our articles' collection in "informationalarticles" channel in our Discord.
And what about @burnpost, would it be punishable under the spam policies? What's up with not doing anything about that spam? It has even gone on Trending...
Steemit has the right to do with their website whatever they want, however, they have no right of authority over the blockchain. If it is a decentralized blockchain great, otherwise, the SEC might find it interesting how much control Steemit seems to exercise over the blockchain. None of us want that, so please let Steem be what it was suppose to be and stop policing it.
The SEC checks into projects and if they deem Steemit to have more control over the blockchain than a business should have over a decentralized protocol, we're all screwed.