Steemit Is Anarchy - Anarchy Is A Good Thing
During my Steemit routine this morning, I came came across a most interesting article titled:
PROPOSAL - How to DEFINE and FIGHT the BAD - Create a COMMITTEE with STRONG ARM to Support Creation of a GREAT STEEMIT CULTURE | Author @edje.
OK! This one caught my eye 👁.
So, I read this PROPOSAL...
...with its interesting and valid observations. What is happening on Steemit just now? How has it evolved - or perhaps devolved? Scary stuff, if you ask me...
I mean Edje's idea of fixing it. Nothing against Edje - I believe the article was penned with good intentions. But,
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. 🔥
Feeling suddenly absorbed by the issue, I replied...
...and a couple of hours later, I was the recipient of quite an extensive answer.
Nothing wrong with that. I love it when we engage. The length of his answer was discouraging at first. Doubling down on his view, making his points...trying to take mine apart...
...one by one. Giving no quarters! So...
I let it sit - 🤔 thinking: "But Edje! I thought I had made my case..."
Apparently not! But I am not one to back down. And in a moment of intuition and motivation, I responded...
... Marathon style... 🏃
However!
..after reviewing it, I remembered my article on How to Multiply your Comment Rewards... and I submitted my counter as a root post instead.
You're reading it now. 😎
I hope that this discussion is picked up by many, and I would love to hear especially from those who have been on Steemit from the early days and have seen it change - often to their dismay.
Edje's solution to correcting bad behavior is brute force. His quick fix: Strong Arm. Under the veil of 'democracy', of course. You know, committees, votes, enforcement, power. Remember...?
Moscow 1917-91? Central Committee. Politburo. This then, the proposed solution...?
... I can not agree with.
Don't be against something - Be for something
I am all for fighting the bad and badness. I hate it when people milk the system and take advantage of others and abuse our good nature.
I love to be part of a society that is based on value creation. But my philosophy is based upon positive re-inforcement - not asserting negative force, unless, of course, the safety of body or property is at stake. Other than that - live by example. Live better!
I'll be short and to the point. I know you don't have all day. But let's think about this:
No. 1 Centralized Control
My Argument:
Steemit is decentralized. A centralized governance goes against what most Steemians are aiming for.
His Counter: Steemit is an Inc, thus their rules are already centrally controlled, codified.
Lets see...
The Steemit creators have built rules 📐 into the platform... And yes, it is a for profit corporation that owns it. And the owners make the rules.
However... No one forces any user to participate. Block chain technology has a creator. The creator makes the rules. In an open environment, freedom invites unsavory characters - just as in real life.
Will additional rules be necessary based on need?
Not unless new functionality is introduced... Right? Have the smart people at Steemit not looked carefully at these other social networks? Have they not embraced a different model than the main stream platforms that bully their users into submission by censorship?
Behave, or WE demonetize your content! What constitutes 'bad' behavior anyway? Who is to decide to punish for what, and how severely? The Politburo? The Committee? Were not even the Soviets required to vote ☑ - on paper? Do we want to learn learn from history?
Have the creators of Steemit... have they not given us a grand opportunity to self-govern? To create value, for which we are compensated, based on how well that value is perceived by other Steemians?
No. 2 Voting - The Central Committee
Voting on rules, not sure I agree either. Two wolves 🐺 🐑 🐺 and one sheep vote on what's for dinner...
Mob rule corrupts. Who would be there to prevent vote buying? The ones that are on the ballot? Hmmm...
Is extortion a possibility? If you don't vote for this rule - I will down-vote you and your followers... into oblivion❣
This might be an extreme example. But is this not what is happening in these democracies the west over. Congress, Parliament, Lobbyists, Special Interests, Committees... Who controls the rulers? Who watches the watchers?
The More Rules Exist - The More Rules Will Be Broken!
Wouldn't you agree:...? Common sense rules are far more difficult to corrupt - though that's not impossible.
No. 3 Self-Voting
Edje wold like to prohibit that. He compares the existence of self voters to Mafia Takeover. Really?
My answer is simple:
No Stress...
It's voluntary, remember? No one can force me to read your stuff, vote for it, or comment on it.
If people don't like the voting habit of some - or the content they post, why not move on? In extreme cases: Go ahead: Mute'em. I have seen some powerful people up-voting their own comments - for the buck of it. Will I engage with them? That's everyone's own decision. No?
Why would we be bothered who up-votes what? Is it any of my business? It is their SteemPower. They didn't take it from your account. It is their life.
💰
Is it for me to tell someone else what to do, as long as they do not inflict harm on us? Is it not true.... ? If the people on Steemit ostracize leeches and spammers, non value creators by refusing to engage with them, will those not soon find Steemit to be a lonely place...?
As long as we feed trolls, they'll thrive...
As far as draining the reward pool goes, I think public naming of those who do is effective. No force. Just knowledge.
I don't see a Mafia anywhere, my friend. I predict that introducing a Central Committee certaintly would - you know, that all mighty Politburo.
Tell me that my values are bad. Your ideology is morally superior! YOUR opinion counts. I have Sheep for dinner. The two wolves can't help but agree...
No. 3 Flagging - Down-Voting
Anon flagging, as proposed by Edje, for me? I's a no go!
The emphasis has to be on accountability.
🏁
Down-voted by a mob of political adversaries because they don't agree with my position?
Let me ask you: What could be worse than not being able to face your accuser? If someone down-votes, there maybe redress... or even recourse.
If Steemians are not willing to put their account name to a down-vote, then there is no down-vote. Just imagine a mob of politically motivated account holders creating havoc on certain users for...
...whatever reason. Accountability is key ...in a reasonable society.
No. 4 Anarchy is a Good Thing
Edje states, that Anarchy is total chaos. No rules. His argument is based on that assumption. The assumption is wrong. It is the result of the hijacking the term by those who love big government.
Anarchy and no rules...
Edje? That's is a misnomer. Anarchy does not mean the absence of rule. Just the opposite. It's the voluntary adherence to rules in the absence of centralized force. Let me rephrase:
Anarchy is the absence of centralized enforcement of rules.
Each person in the community takes responsibility for their own action - if someone breaks the easy to understand rules, they will be treated by the community accordingly. No libraries full of law books in Legalease, the entrapment language.
Here is how Anarchy would work in the real world:
Simple animation and explanation of anarchy by Evelyn Kennedy
No. 5 The Solution
Last but not least: The Solution: The quick fix you asked for...
You wrote:
The nature of humans is to think of its own before thinking of others.
True for some, not for all. Human morality is corrupted. Men are fallen creatures. A sad state of affairs, indeed. But not hopeless. Not irredeemable.
Remember? The Creator Makes The Rules.
Human behavior is governed by code, the code or philosophy someone subscribes to.
I happen to be a Bible believing Christian. I am not perfect by any stretch of imagination.
However, if we were just to try to be the best people we can be, and if we were to love our neighbors as ourselves, if we were committed to refrain from stealing, if everyone was focussed on value creation - and if we loved our Creator - Jesus - more than ourselves, the world, including Steemit, would be a better place.
Now there is an idea for a quick fix.
-ch @globocop
ch @globocop
#1: Uh.... We can upvote ourselves?!! BRB!! (giggles.. kidding)
#2: With 10 upvote allowance, why would anyone bother upvoting themselves?
#3: If there's one thing GAB has taught me, it's that anon downvoting/flagging will kill a social media platform faster than Jack Dorsey.
#4: "The nature of humans is to think of its own before thinking of others.": Yes. That is the nature of existence. Without it, one ceases to have life.
#5: Ah... "morality". A subjective topic, indeed.
And, as you've laid out here, it is for that reason alone, the subjectivity and not objectivity of defining what is "moral", is why Steemit remaining decentralized is paramount.
Thanks for the post.
I really enjoy your entries.
Hello @disarrangedjane
Thanks for ya comment.
1 Go ahead - make my day... 😂
2 It's not as much an allowance as the ability to upvote at 100% voting power while regenerating back to 100% in 24 hours. You can use more - or use eSteeem to lower the voting power to give you more votes...
3 Good point and hopefully taking into account by those who vote for political reason, rather than flagging spam/plagiarism
3.1 Dorksey WHO? 🤣
4 On a plane: Put the oxygen mask on first before you help others, otherwise you may run out of... breathies
5 Not for God, it isn't
6 Merci!
Thanks for reading, upvoting and reblogging! 🐸
"Dorksey". LOL!
#5: "Not for God, it isn't". Yeah, but...One must first know the Word, to know where God stands.
I agree wit your stand point. I would only add one thing. With self voting I don't break any rules. Code allow self voting! They can change the code if they want. For me it's much worse with all kind of vote buying lately.
Oh I love that SCRAT ... the most adorable character in the Ice Age movies. 😆
Self voting doesn't break the rules, indeed. Anyone can choose how to vote. Vote buying: hmm, I am guilty to boost my posts with 3 useful bots in particular - to give them more visibility.
There are schemes out there that pool whalepower for a considerable price - even tradable on exchanges. It requires capital though - and I am not sure how this works, and if this is a win-win.
But even that isn't against the rules. So, at which point does it become a sin in your view?
Thank you for your generous support, @oldtimer,
-ch @globocop
My point is that here the code is rule. You cant play against it. Everything else is allowed. What individual think it's not important and every intervention will harm the free spirit of steemit. Beside this: after every HF there come changes, that's why we still in beta and we all learning on the way.
Totally valid point and in the spirit of the post.
Following , since you've been around - looking forward to your point of views...
Happy Tuesday!
Thanks for chiming in!
-ch @globocop
@globocop thank you for your counter post in response to my comment (here) your comment (here) to my post (here).
You state in your post
I agree with you! Also I love to be part of a society that praises the good, that does good, that is good. I think we are on the same page!
Do Good
The theory of showing the do-good part to others, will result in others to follow the examples and at the same time will result in reducing the bad to levels that are acceptable (it is debatable what that level is for what abuse), is a theory that is never shown to in real life to be a solution that creates a sustainable community, at least in everything I know and learned so far. If you have examples that worked well, please let me know.
Note
Also I do like the debate through which I can learn how others are thinking about specific topics, to broaden my horizon, and along the way I may even learn something new, and I may even change my opinions. I therefore would have loved to see a somewhat more fair response. I will not go into details, but from your post I read that most of the nuances, questions and suggestions I included in my original post, and my comment to your comment, are not taken into account, whilst 1 example I used becomes a prime component in your response. My response to your comment was lengthy because the topic of how a community shall be build and what rules shall apply, and who defines those rules is not easy. Various systems we know from history have flaws. Some more than others, but in the end all systems have flaws. The question is: are all system applied in the correct way? Can we change things to tested systems that leads to a better system. Whatever it is! At this point I'm quite open to any suggestions. But, suggestions must be practical! Must include the human aspect! Must include the individual! I like to learn more of your solution, how in practise this will work. Steemit does have rules and you tell me that it is fine the creator of Steemit decided on the rules and the community doesn't have a say in it. On the other hand you say that the community shall have all the freedom. You also say something wrt de-centralised that shall give all the freedom. However, the creators rules are to be accepted, or choose not to be part of the community. Fair enough to choose not to be part of the community, but I see a big contradiction in your statements. Maybe you can further clarify these? Of course, you do not have to do that, it is your free will to do so or not, but I really like to understand you position better.
Hello @edje
Thanks for your reply! I appreciate your professionalism with which you answered.
Had I rebuttled the entire article/proposal, I'd still be writing... 😎 So - I chose the parts that stuck out and focused on those. Since the entire proposal is public, as are the comments and your reply, anyone interested is able to familiarize themselves with your points in detail. The wonders of Blockchain!
Doing good - we agree on that. However, we always want to think about unwanted ramifications of certain system implementations, practices.
As far as Steemit goes, we already have a solution. A decentralized committee, if you will. One that is voted on. Our Witnesses. Our discussion inspired yet a new post idea...
...An article on Witnesses, out within the next 48. See, you are very inspirational!
Witnesses are voted into their job. They oversee hardfork implementations, and they discuss/propose policy adjustments. See, for example this post, which is picked up by witnesses. But I am sure, you are fully aware - you ain't a newbee... 🐞...
That said, your question about system solutions is valid. It goes deeper than Steemit. Exploring details here would exceed the essence of your proposal in my view. Perhaps we can start a post - joint venture on the subject. Not sure if this is feasible.
In any event, we do not want to re-invent the wheel. The Anarchy vid I posted - what did you think? It's about contractual governance, not government. I highly recommend this book: The Voluntary City
by David . Beito, Peter Gordon and Alexander Tabarok. ISBN: 0-472-08837-8 on a feasible solution.
Thanks for an engaging discussion, my friend.
-ch @globocop
I agree the witnesses have a role to safeguard the blockchain features. Witnesses are voted for in a form of democratic system.
My suggestion to explore is similar with the difference the whole community vote for any question that anybody can post and/or bring forward (ie direct control instead of indirect control through witnesses). A committee can by much more an execution arm of whatever the community voted for.
I've seen suggestions by others to eg require 80% of votes to let something pass instead of 51%. Similar to country basic laws that generally require 66% or more instead of 50%. Interestingly Switzerland has an system implemented wherein most of the decisions on government level requires a nationwide referendum.
There are issues with leaving the decision and execution by the individual, while there are also issues when a institution is created with self control, ie not direct control by those who it concerns, the entire community. I try to figure out if a combination of the good things of various systems can be combined in a way so that the system we gonna end up is a better system than what we have.
Today most of the power is in the hands of a few: whales, witnesses and Steemit Inc. They decide and with that they control, whatever the rest of the community thinks are not. That is something that I think we do not want to continue with. I also see many wars starting again when we leave the judge/execution at the individuals level. Next to that, not everything can be implemented by technology, therefor the requirement for some 'soft' rules is needed IMHO. In the end we want a community that will survive and we need to find ways that the community indeed will survive, and we need to think what is required for that.
At this stage it is difficult to determine what is required, but we know a coupe of things that could help. For instance we had a blockchain rule limiting the number of posts per day per account. Now this limit is lifted and we see soooo much more spam (ok, what spam is, is somehow subjective, but some is clearly spam). Two examples: https://steemit.com/@ecoworld/comments and https://steemit.com/@sandrino. For the first example a whale decided to downvote all comments with rewards (scroll all the way down). The other one is also spam in my opinion, but thus far this is either not considered as spam by whales, or it is not yet discovered (also some may not regard this as spam, for sure it is not really clear as the first example). Both accounts do try to take quite a lot of rewards from the reward pool, ie taken away rewards from the rest of the community, ie also from us.
I personally do not believe all individuals can make deals with each other at all times. That is why I think we as a collective shall make deals with each other using a method that we all have a say (that is why I think a vote weight for a community rule should be independent from SP and should be direct by any community member, since when it is depended on SP, money rules and that is not what it should be about IMHO).
As mentioned before, it is not easy to come to a good system, since otherwise we would have seen good systems in real life, but since last 20-30 years we see even in the western world a degradation of the systems we have with the systems trending to 'money' rules and not stakeholders rules (a stakeholder can also be someone who is not able to deal with the intelligence of some other community members, due to personal situation, intelligence, illness someone without funds/money, someone with curation abilities but no writing abilities, ie can still contribute to the community in a good way, maybe in a very valuable way, but get much less rewards for it (75% or more goes to posts, 25% or less to curation)). These are blockchain rules that are open for debate and community regulation IMHO.
Thanks again for your thought-out response.
I think that rules are in place. Existing tools/groups, such as @steemcleaners must be utilized better by the community. It's all there . It's transparent.
There may always be bad apples in the basket - and by acting positively and live by example, we will organically keep the foul-ups at bay.
Thanks again for an engaging discussion.
-ch @globocop
Well, thanks for your comment. I personally find Steemcleaners to limited in what the go after, but that is my opinion :)
I think it's more people who are needed on the @steemcleaners side. They do address spam/plagiarism etc. So, at least we can support them in what they do.
Oh for sure I support them! I think more of those account/groups are required though. Lets see how the community will pick all these things up in the (near) future.
Congratulations @globocop! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPOh, it's nowhere near an anarchy, the first definition of anarchy is a state in which there are no hierarchies, Steemit clearly fails here, there are whales who control almost everything, dolphins and us poor minnows, flagging is a sort of government intervention, you will say but it's good because that way bad content doesn't get to be rewarded, but if you look at it it is like government intervention a few decide whether I can get ahead or not, and they are robbing me of money I made, it's worse than taxation. So maybe these things are good but they certainly don't make Steemit an anarchy.
There are many definitions of anarchy out there. I happen to subscribe to the one as shown in the video.
Poor minnows? Yeah. I am a minnow, too. It feels odd to be at the bottom of the food chain. But with quality and persistence - free market allows to work your way up. Whales/Orcas - powerful indeed. However MANY are dedicated to helping minnows, take @aggroed or @ausbitbank and @fyrstikken for example. And @dragosroua and many others who do excellent minnow support work.
Thanks for your thoughts. 😎
The definition of love.
So anarchy is not defined, we really don't know what it is? a lot of people are after a featureless dream?
Anarchy is defined in many ways - most of them misguided. The video above explains my position well. Everyone can pursue their dreams. Those who are disabled, the morals of the society are so high, that no one will perish. Resources are plenty to go around on earth.
Doesn't it seem rather dull? To me, anyway. Having spent time and effort on these other places - it seems a waste of productive time. Content here is a notch up in quality... The incentives: great... the potential: significant, if we put the effort in...
-ch @globocop
It is nice to read a thoughtful thought-provoking post amongst the many brain dead posts that clutter this site. Thank you.
This post has received a 4.02 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @globocop.
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by globocop from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, and someguy123. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows and creating a social network. Please find us in the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
If you like what we're doing please upvote this comment so we can continue to build the community account that's supporting all members.
This post got a
50.25% upvote thanks to @globocop - Hail Eris !