General problems for steemit 來源/資深anyx Source / Senior anyx
Source / Senior anyx
Is the tragedy of the exploitation of the individual group. So the individual exploits the group and leaves it alone and this becomes selfish
In the past few days I have noticed that I'm getting colder
Where we apply the first remark, which is exploitation in Istitit, we hope to improve for the better
The point of vote, comment, and points I get
As that point is not rewarding as it has become a barrier to the user as he gets some cents for a large subject and important and does not get Mazy result of a subject is not important .. This necessarily selfish. We hope that the system of bonuses will review the system and that the rewards be fair and effective and also in a way that helps the user to spread and spread to everyone and avoid selfishness in obtaining the rewards
There is also a big problem, plagiarism and theft of publications. The fact that those who follow this is not enough. The site is large and the followers are many. It is a great increase in its credibility. We want to increase the diligence in tracking fraud and also to work as a system and one team so that everything is well distributed.
How to Distribute Justice
A second issue is fairness, and the distribution of reward from the reward pool. I have strong opinions on content, enough to continuously butt heads with several whales (no names -- no need to brigade).
The fact is that whales have the ability to make a post trend instantly. This can be a good thing or a bad thing -- given a benevolent whale, a really strong minnow post can be put into the spotlight despite the user not having a large following. But if the quality of the post is low, we run into a very distinct issue: users view the front page as a metric to gauge successfulness of their own posts. Then it becomes a case of "monkey see, monkey do", where the average user, seeing plagiarism, copy paste, and low-quality posts on the front page, contemplates their risk to reward of each and every blog post.
Why would someone spend hours on a quality post, when they can spit out 4 low quality posts a day on multiple accounts, and randomly get chosen by a whale?
When a whale upvotes a low-quality post, and causes it to trend, it only further incentivizes this in the future. However, curation rewards are given mostly to the whale anyways, so they have selfish reasons to NOT remove their vote (and use vote power), and keep the resulting curation reward, contributing to the tragedy of the commons.
What is Right?
As one of the head combatants of abuse and plagiarism over the past weeks, I have had many discussions and many arguments over the direction of content on Steemit. While I believe that copy paste is a waste of my time, again, many users disagree, and mine and others' combative nature against what we feel is abuse has been more vigilante actions than anything else.
Personally, I feel that Steemit should NOT be a news aggregation source, unless the provider of the information IS a news source. In this case, I believe people who copy paste articles that are not their own, whether or not it contains a source, should NOT be encouraged. This is equivalent to the difference in a reddit post or facebook status. Do you copy paste the article to reddit? NO! You just have a link and promote (and provide) discussion. Do you make your facebook status a full article? NO! You just have a link and promote (and provide) discussion.
We can do so much better than that; Steemit is something new and original. Lets be original too.
But what is RIGHT? If the answer were unclear, that would be one thing, however there currently is no answer as far as I am aware. Neither @dan nor @ned have made a public stance on official or unofficial set of rules for the content on steemit.com. Also, note that I am saying steemit.com here, not the blockchain steem. I think in the future there can and perhaps should be avenues on the steem blockchain that can be independent from the company and website, but that is off this topic.
Are reposts okay? Is copy paste okay? What is right?
I don't actually know.
But what I do know, is that everyone is acting independently on what they feel is right. And this independent selfishness is again contributing to the tragedy of the commons.
There is an open issue on the steemit github here.
This issue is less than a day old and already is one of the most discussed issues. The code has already been implemented and is on track to be included in the next hardfork. There has also been a MASSIVE discussion on this in steemit.chat, and we have been debating the potential issues that this change could impart.
There is already a very forward response to the issue here, and while I think the tone of the post is a bit exaggerated, it shows that there are people already speaking out on the potential for censorship of users.
Could this be another case of acting in what only one believes in, contributing to the tragedy of the commons?
To Be Clear...
This post is meant to incite discussion, on the following points (summarized):
How can we prevent the tragedy of the commons by inciting communal behaviour rather than selfish behaviour?
What is right, or fair, and are there (unofficial) rules to steemit?
How can we improve transparency with the witnesses and leadership?
I hope to use what voice I have as "the cheetah bot creator" to get some some attention on these matters. As I am a believer in Steemit (I'm not powering down), I hope we can discuss and solve these issues, so let's try and be civil in the comment sections, and think of strategies to improve the current situation.
by frenci
تم تجاوز الحد الأقصى للأحرف
5000/5000
الترجمة من: الإنجليزية
تم تجاوز الحد الأقصى لعدد الحروف البالغ 5000 بمقدار 401 حرف:
post is meant to incite discussion, on the following points (summarized): How can we prevent the tragedy of the commons by inciting communal behaviour rather than selfish behaviour? What is right, or fair, and are there (unofficial) rules to steemit? How can we improve transparency with the witnesses and leadership? I hope to use what voice I have as "the cheetah bot creator" to get some some att
Source / Senior anyx
Est-ce la tragédie de l'exploitation du groupe individuel? Ainsi, l'individu exploite le groupe et le laisse seul et cela devient égoïste
Au cours des derniers jours, j'ai remarqué que je devenais plus froid
Lorsque nous appliquons la première remarque, qui est l'exploitation à Istitit, nous espérons améliorer le mieux
Le point de vote, les commentaires et les points que je reçois
Comme ce point n'est pas enrichissant car il est devenu un obstacle pour l'utilisateur, car il reçoit des centimes pour un sujet important et important et n'obtient pas le résultat Mazy d'un sujet n'est pas important ... Ce qui est nécessairement égoïste. Nous espérons que le système de bonus examinera le système et que les récompenses seront justes et efficaces, de manière à aider l'utilisateur à se propager et à se propager à tous et à éviter l'égoïsme dans l'obtention des récompenses
Il y a aussi un gros problème, un plagiat et un vol de publications. Le fait que ceux qui suivent cela ne suffit pas. Le site est vaste et les abonnés sont nombreux. C'est une grande augmentation de sa crédibilité. Nous voulons augmenter la diligence dans le suivi de la fraude et aussi travailler en tant que système et une équipe afin que tout soit bien distribué.
Comment distribuer la justice
Une deuxième question est l'équité, et la répartition de la récompense du pool de récompense. J'ai des opinions fortes sur le contenu, assez pour continuer les têtes boutonnées avec des baleines multiples (pas de noms - pas besoin de brigades).
Le fait est que les baleines ont la possibilité de faire une tendance postale instantanément. Cela peut être une bonne chose ou une mauvaise chose - étant donné une baleine bienveillante, un poste de minnow vraiment puissant peut être mis en vedette malgré que l'utilisateur ne dispose pas d'un grand suivi. Mais si la qualité de l'article est faible, nous rencontrons un problème très distinct: les utilisateurs voient la page d'accueil comme une mesure pour évaluer la réussite de leurs propres publications. Ensuite, il devient un cas de "monkey see, monkey do", où l'utilisateur moyen, voyant le plagiat, copier des puces et des messages de mauvaise qualité sur la première page, en supposant leur risque de récompense de chaque article de blog.
Pourquoi quelqu'un passerait-il des heures sur un poste de qualité, quand ils pourraient cracher 4 messages de mauvaise qualité par jour sur plusieurs comptes et choisis au hasard par une baleine?
Quand une baleine affiche une publication de mauvaise qualité et la fait marcher, elle ne l'incitera plus qu'à l'avenir. Cependant, les récompenses de conservation sont principalement attribuées à la baleine, de sorte qu'elles ont des raisons égoïstes pour ne pas supprimer leur vote (et utiliser le pouvoir de vote), et conserver la récompense de conservation présumée, ce qui contribue à la tragédie des biens communs.
تم تجاوز الحد الأقصى للأحرف
5000/5000
الترجمة من: الإنجليزية
تم تجاوز الحد الأقصى لعدد الحروف البالغ 5000 بمقدار 401 حرف:
post is meant to incite discussion, on the following points (summarized): How can we prevent the tragedy of the commons by inciting communal behaviour rather than selfish behaviour? What is right, or fair, and are there (unofficial) rules to steemit? How can we improve transparency with the witnesses and leadership? I hope to use what voice I have as "the cheetah bot creator" to get some some att
來源/資深anyx
是個人群體剝削的悲劇。所以個人利用這個團體，獨自一人，這變得自私了
在過去的幾天裡，我注意到我越來越冷
我們在哪裡申請第一個言論，這是在伊斯蒂蒂特的剝削，我們希望能夠更好地改善
我得到的投票，評論和點數
因為這點不是有益的，因為它已經成為用戶的障礙，因為它為一個大的主題獲得了一些美分，並且沒有得到一個主題的Mazy結果並不重要。這必然是自私的。我們希望獎金制度能夠對製度進行審查，獎勵是公正有效的，也可以幫助用戶傳播和傳播給每個人，避免獲得獎勵的自私
還有一個大問題，剽竊和盜版出版物。事實上，跟隨這一點的人還不夠。網站很大，追隨者很多。它的信譽大大增加。我們希望增加跟踪欺詐的努力，並且還要作為一個系統和一個團隊進行工作，以使所有內容都分佈好。
如何分配正義
第二個問題是公平的，獎勵的獎勵分配。我對內容有強烈的意見，足以連續使用多個鯨魚（沒有名字 - 不需要旅）。
事實是，鯨魚有能力立即發布後期趨勢。這可能是一件好事或壞事 - 鑑於一個仁慈的鯨魚，儘管用戶沒有大量追踪，真正強大的min now now now也可以放在聚光燈下。但是，如果職位的質量很低，我們遇到了一個非常明顯的問題：用戶將頭版作為衡量自己職位成功率的指標。那麼就成了一個“猴子見猴子”的例子，普通用戶在頭版上看到剽竊，複製粘貼和低質量的帖子，假設每個博客都有報酬的風險。
為什麼有人會花上幾個小時在高質量的職位，他們可以在多個帳戶上每天吐出4個低質量的職位，並隨機選擇一個鯨魚？
當一隻鯨魚升高了一個低質量的帖子，並導致它的趨勢，它只會進一步激勵這個在未來。然而，策展獎勵主要是針對鯨魚，所以他們有自私的理由，不能刪除他們的投票（並使用投票權），並保持所產生的策展獎勵，有助於公墓的悲劇。
什麼是對的
作為過去幾週濫用和剽竊的頭號戰士之一，我對Steemit的內容方向進行了許多討論和許多爭論。雖然我相信複製粘貼是浪費我的時間，但是再次，許多用戶不同意，我和其他人的對抗性質與我們認為是濫用的是一樣比其他任何事情都更加強硬。
就個人而言，我覺得Steemit不應該是新聞聚合來源，除非信息提供者是新聞來源。在這種情況下，我認為不要鼓勵複製不屬於自己的粘貼文章的人，不管它是否包含源。這相當於reddit帖子或Facebook狀態的區別。你把文章粘貼到reddit嗎？ NO！你只是有一個鏈接和推廣（和提供）的討論。你的Facebook狀態是完整的嗎？ NO！你只是有一個鏈接和推廣（和提供）的討論。
我們可以做得比這更好; Steemit是新的和原創的。也是原創。
但是什麼是權利？如果答案不清楚，那會是一回事，但是據我所知，目前還沒有答案。 @dan或@ned都沒有對steemit.com上的內容的官方或非官方規則進行公開的立場。另外，請注意，我在這裡說steemit.com，而不是塊鏈。我認為在未來，可以有時候應該是可以獨立於公司和網站的steem blockchain上的途徑，但這是脫離這個話題。
轉貼好嗎複製粘貼好嗎？什麼是對的
我其實不知道
但是我所知道的是，每個人都是獨立地表達自己的感覺是正確的。而這種獨立的自私又是造成公共悲劇的原因。
這裡有一個公開的問題。
這個問題不到一天，已經是最討論的問題了。該代碼已經被實施，並且正在進入下一個硬盤。在steemit.chat也進行了大量的討論，我們一直在辯論這種變化可能傳遞的潛在問題。
在這方面已經有很大的回應，而我覺得這個帖子的語調有點誇張，這表明有人已經說出了對用戶進行審查的可能性。
這可能是另一種行為，只有一個人相信，貢獻公共悲劇的情況？
要清除...