You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why I am quitting steemit - and you should too
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.
I just love how she doesn't get that this isn't Facebook. But I love even more that this convo will be seen until the end of the Internet :D
And so everyone will continue to be potential victims of abuse and this platform will never become popular with quality authors and content creators. Because once you see the hundreds of flags I did on content I put my heart and soul into? You'll leave too. It hurts. It's offensive, and violent, and everything that is wrong with the Internet condensed into one awfully negative website.
Srsly, I didn't get attacked like this on reddit, 4chan or even in my olden days of dialup DALnet on IRC (yeah, I am old). Never did I feel this bullied and personally attacked. I did nothing to merit this, and the way some people in the community accept this type of behavior as "part of the platform" just makes me lose faith in people. Greed always wins, apparently.
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.
So you too support bernie's personal and verbally offensive attack on me? You think I deserved that?
I think I do understand the steem blockchain better now. It's a pyramid scam with a few old-money millionaires making a profit on the back of everyone else. There's no censorship resistance. That's a cute myth. Anyone with enough power can silence anyone they don't like without having to answer to ANYONE. And the community is just silently accepting their own inferiority and inability to compete with bernie and whoever he chooses to support.
The only reason my posts are visible is people who give a shit and oppose bernie's reign of terror over anyone who doesn't fall in line behind his scammy abuse of the platform. I honestly wish you were one of those people as I have heard positive things about you. But it appears you rather support bullying on the platform and mansplain it as me not understanding blockchains. Bummer for the little fish, I guess.
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.