You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: I filmed this video of @ned @pkattera and @sneak talking about the SMTs and the future of Steemit
Do you read your stuff too? Maybe if you take some time to thoroughly think about your attitude you'll realize how you're just a troll, not a fighter for anything.
Yes, unjustified flags happen. But don't underestimate our community. If it's worth getting it back up, it will happen. Seen it a thousand times before. And I clearly see why it didn't happen for you, too.
You say how great "our" community is. But that's speaking from your position of sitting on a lot of steem power. Of course, it's easy to say how the game is not rigged, and insist that everyone's united behind you –when it's rigged in your favour. But you ignore the majority of the community and those who make up the bulk of the creativity and the best content on steemit.
No, that's from a position of someone involved in everyday business instead of just seeing his own small blog box. I was solely talking about posts that get downvoted, and with the overview I have I can confidently say that I do not see the described censorship issue, just a troll crying about his stupid idea not being discussed or rewarded.
The majority of the community does not have a problem with flags, and I know of a lot of cases where overflagged posts were recovered by OUR community (that sometimes involves me).
Oh is it? Because the condenser has been coded in a way so that it shows less low-value posts (and the only way to attract upvotes (without money) is by being seen) and hides posts which have been downvoted.
But the main issue is that crapitalist whales can abuse their power (e.g. @haejin, who downvotes anyone who complains about him) and censor content by limiting its exposure. Why is this? Well whales decide what goes on the trending page, which is what users see most. Users are more likley to follow that content, and will see subsequent content by whales. At every step of the journey minnows are likley to get seen less than whales.
Having limited exposure is FAR from being censored. Also, complaining about having less exposure than others who are here up to 6 times as long as you is just silly. And it hurts you the most, because you lose focus for what's really important.
What you describe as a problem is just an unchangeable fact. The only measurement on a blockchain that cannot be manipulated is stake. So yes, those with the biggest financial investment have the biggest say in the direction. As I said earlier in the discussion though, the mass can outweigh them anyway (if enough of them care).
And to conclude this topic for me (once more ;-) ) - maybe it helps you to understand that the trending page and the current reward pool aren't as important as many think. What steem offers is much more than a way to earn a few bucks for content. And it's surely not suited to objectively rate the quality of the content. To me, the rewards are mainly a means of distribution of a currency. For a currency to be worth something it must take effort to receive it. There are always those with more means to make money, and they mostly come from having money before, or the right skills. I won't hold you off from fighting windmills, but you might want to reconsider.
I am earnest in my efforts, if you want to call that being a 'troll', well that's your prerogative. Also, I do not underestimate the community at all, and I have had flags removed.
Even if they didn't touch the issue of how flagging effects rewards, the simple elimination of post-hiding, and text-dithering, that would go a long way towards signaling that Steemit is in favor of freedom of expression.
In the long run, it's the right thing to do and would be very beneficial to the health of the platform overall.
Imagine if you were searching your feed and you saw a flagged post, but instead of being dithered out there was simply a flag icon next to the time that it was posted.
That would be more productive, people could click the story, read it immediately without jumping through hoops and then decide whether or not they want to counter the reward aspect of the flagging.
Earnesty starts by not inventing terms like "soft-censorship" to link a minor issue to a serious one.
Now you even admit that the community weighed against the "all powerful" whales soft-childporning you...
Flags are not just for rewards. Hiding posts is a necessity, and the implemented solution works for the required cases (and there's the real child porn now). It has its kinks and sometimes something else gets under the wheel, but as you and I both agree in most cases the community reacts - which is exactly how it is designed.
I just wish it worked as well with the trending posts too - if anything, we need more flags! ;-)
You support flagging, but the issue with flagging is how centralized it's become. A few people control most of the steem power, which means they choose what goes. The only reason you stick up for this is because you have a lot of steem power, and it helps you when others support and engage with the platform, because you get a large cut of the reward pool (and their hard work). This
Just one more thing. No idea if it clicks for you, but there's a good reason whales are whales. Having a huge stake is a big commitment. The price for a steem has been between 7 cents and 8$ the last months. Whales held on to them during all this time.
And imagine all the whales dumping their stake, driving the price down near 0 and everyone can stock up as they wish. In the same moment, there'd be new whales again.
Broader distribution is happening over time. But there will always be whales and minnows. And it will become harder and harder for the minnows to be heard as competition grows. Early adopters had a head start, yes. We took a huge risk though. When we started working with this platform we didn't know if our rewards would ever be worth something. And we keep working since. Maybe if you'd kept being productive instead of letting frustration take over and trying to change a system you don't fully understand yet you'd be further than rep42 too.
Damn. One more thing I said. But there's just so much you didn't think about in your position, still you're so convinved you're going the right path. I think the only question left for me is:
If you don't like a game, why do you play it? Don't you have things you believe in to spend your time with?
You suffer from this thing called survivors bias. You think because you invested a lot you should get a lot. I think you fail to understand the potential decentralized media has, simply viewing this as an attempt to make money. The argument I make (which you are incapable of rebutting, despite your steem power) is that everyone should have a right to have their ideas heard. This is good for a number of reasons.
However you suggest that this is bad. The system you support limits the exposure of those with little money, and means that those with a lot of money can flag posts they don't like to make them less visible and upvote the posts they do like to make them more visible. The platform does this in a few ways:
To your point that I should "shut up and go away" - go find someone who cares about you, your sad little life and your "I have money so I'm so great" chant. Because honestly you're a stuck-up little prick, who thinks they have a fundamental, god-given right to all the money they make.
I tried to explain my reasoning to you here and in our main discussion. Whatever you might want to interpret in addition is up to you.
You're here since a few months and want to explain to me "how it has become"without a good understanding why things are designed that way ... this is a waste of time.
Your analogy for soft-censorship was inappropriate, and vile.
It seems to me, that you do not take this matter seriously.