You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why I am quitting steemit - and you should too
Any platform that permits free speech by everyone on the planet will have a set of people who, in your terms, "terrorise its users".
What is it that you think @berniesanders dictates? He has no special or privileged position over any other user of the platform.
Hey Sneak, just checking I have this correct: if someone calls a colour scheme "gay", that is hate speech and unacceptable, but showing a blatant lack of respect for women and calling them bitches is all good?
You don't have that correct at all, and it would appear you have constructed a straw man with which to intentionally mischaracterize my view.
I think you will find from @berniesanders' -19 reputation score (if it is indeed to his content to which you refer) that steemit's community absolutely does not consider his content "all good".
Then why sit there and turn a blind eye as he pays himself heftily for it.
Too many newbies to full flag that need help understanding tags?
Dammit! I missed being able to upvote this hilarious coment!
He downvotes to hell anyone who dares to simply and politely ASK him for his motives, he attacks people with the power he has accumulated by using a botnet of fake users, and throws around insults like this is /b/, and you're telling me this is OK and accepted on steemit?
Everyone is permitted to vote (up or down) however they wish with their stake.
(FWIW, his "botnet" has no more effect on anything than if all of the SP in his various accounts were consolidated into one account. He just spreads it out to make it look bigger. It conveys him no specific advantage.)
As for his insults, I think you can see from his negative reputation score that his immaturity is not accepted at all by the users of this platform.
My account it buried and no content I will ever post appear here anyway. He has the power and ability to abuse the flagging feature to silence anyone he feels like. THAT is a major flaw in the platform. And if it's not being addressed, then it is what will destroy steemit. People like him silencing people like me. While this behavior is supported and justified by you.
That raises an interesting issue. Maybe there should be a limit to how much rep damage (and also rep increase) any one member can do. That way we could avoid any of the centralised censorship that you are proposing, but it will still offer a level of protection against a single large SP holder who was intent on destroying another member.
It's also got me wondering... If one user can destroy you, then it should be possible for another equally powerful user to restore your reputation. Is the reputation score linear like that, or is there some other magic sauce involved?
You make an extremely valid point, as rep is highly gamable presently. Something like you're suggesting would provide some insulation against that, and make rep a more purposeful metric.
You are correct about rep being equally fungible in both directions. @skeptic has had his rep driven into the ground like a post by @berniesanders, and swiftly re-elevated by those that admire his trolling, unrepentant, rebellious ways.
@skeptic, if he could write better, could prolly write a book on rep.
Thanks!
Reputation is a non-consensus value, which is to say it's entirely a UI calculation. It has nothing whatsoever to do with your posting ability, posting reach, payout, or anything else.
Ah ok. I have been mixing up reputation with flagged posts. But still, if your posts get lots of flags they get hidden on most of the front ends.
well lets see if u can create or destroy thins threw seer intent alone example cat 1~infinity hurricanes then YES DUH!
He's one user with 100s of bots. Even if it was possible to limit the damage one of his users can do, he'll just use the whole army to reach the same cumulative effect. Perhaps the solution is some kind of "blocking" mechanism to allow users to block bullies' bots from downvoting them en masse. But I am getting the feeling no one is looking for a solution, but rather ways to excuse this type of behavior on the platform.
Why do you think that his multiple votes from multiple user accounts has some "cumulative effect"?
It does the exact same thing as if all of those accounts' stake were held by one account and made with one vote.
Not in terms of rep. The rep is spread amongst the various multiples, and unlike SP, can be greater thereby than if he had but one alt.
This kind of "blocking" would be nothing else but censorship based on subjective assessments. So who would you allow to decide whether an account qualifies as a bullies´bot account?
On Facebook and twitter I have the ability to block people from viewing my content when signed in. They don't see my comments or posts, and so cannot attack me. I would very much like the ability to prevent mean people from randomly flagging my content or writing mean comments on my posts because they have all the power and can afford it.
Imagine what other social networks would look like if people couldn't block the bullies, trolls and spammers from hurting them through the platform. Do you think Facebook would have as many users as it does if it supported bullying and dictatorship like steemit does?
Yeah, I don't either.
Welcome to the blockchain! Every piece of content will always be visible for everyone.
Create a front-end that supports blocking certain usernames from showing on your posts or being able to see your posts only if you have befriended those users.
It seems to me you don't understand what a blockchain is and the public and open aspect of it combined with censorship resistance. You keep saying he is silencing you when anyone can still read your posts and comments even if they were flagged by everyone on the platform.
Stop comparing it to centralized platforms from the past, you should know the differences between them by now.
If you don't like it then you aren't forced to be here, but don't go around saying that everyone should leave and how the platform will die just cause you are close minded about it.
I think reputation should be based on follows and mutes instead of payouts. Some of the attacks in payouts are just to have an effect on reputation
He does not have that power or ability; nobody is silenced as a result of flagging—by anyone, regardless of their SP. Your posts go through as normal. Nobody on steemit can silence anyone else.
You're being somewhat disingenuous, as you are silent no matter how loud you scream if no one can hear you. Posts from accounts with negative rep are invisible.
Screaming into a void.
What minnow can do with their stake what he does with his and not have their account nuked?
No account can be nuked by anyone else, regardless of how much stake they have.
It's a figure of speech meaning the account rendered powerless or useless. It is easily done to a minnow or even dolphin account whose reputation being destroyed can mean no longer being able to reach an audience making both social interactions and monetary gains significantly more difficult. For example it is a nuked account when downvoted so many times that the account holder is forced to power down and move to another account or another platform. Larger accounts that do not post can also be rendered powerless (proven by the abit&smooth experiment before the hardfork) but what you say about this user not having special privileges is a lie. We can see he is not held accountable like everybody he holds accountable himself. Blind eyes are turned with every thing that this user does that other users cannot do without "having their account nuked" or rendered powerless.
I like this.
All minnows can and should do at this point is cash out and leave steemit to bernie and his bot army. It's a lost fight because the people with the power put their greed waaay ahead of their desire for steemit to be a successful content platform. And since that's not about to change, and bernie and his bots will just get stronger, I recommend you cash out and seek out other platforms for content monetization.
He has mined considerable special privileges, and he especially likes to use them thusly.