Hey Asshole, Stop Working More Than Us, You Get Paid Too Much!

in #work7 years ago (edited)

Yeah, that's what it is turning into now. "You're not allowed to do more and get rewarded for it by others. You're the problem for doing the work you do. It's not fair." Hence why I did the communism post yesterday to show the ridiculousness of this line of fallacious reasoning.

But morons just want to be morons and keep denying their behavior, while I'm just the "whiner" who is "harming the community". I already called this out as the tactic these manipulators use each and every time. If you go back to other community issues ("sock puppets") that needed to be addressed, these whales flagged down those posts and commented how it was "bad for community".

Making 3-4 posts, and get rewarded differently for each post, is still too much for some people to handle in their jealousy.

I should not be allowed to post 4 times a day, because you say so?
I should not be allowed to post the type of content I want, because you say so?

Go fuck yourself. Seriously. This is absurd.

I tried higher quality content, upping my game even higher, and the first time a post like that was done with original work, infographic, text, audio and video, (Trinity of Consciousness), it was flagged while my other post that day was double the payout and not flagged.

Then more of my original work was targeted for flagging while making less than my lower quality unoriginal posts. I even talked about this in the main post yesterday, but no one wants to see that reality going on which is why I have had enough of this bullshit flagging against my original content. I never objected on flagging the other content, other than the undefined justifications used to do it. But sure, flag the other content I make that isn't original, isn't as important quality information for people to learn about. Ok. I mentioned this before. But, people who don't want to read or understand, just turn it into "you just want to make money so your pathetic".

If you want me to respond to your comments, then start understanding the issue with facts, in reality, and not invent some fantasy for why I'm doing this. I'm not going to try to correct everyone's comments when they obviously aren't even interested to look at the issue honestly through the data provided. I explained it before, and now I'm doing it again. Go back to the other post with the data yesterday for the proof in the data from the blockhain. Open your eyes and see how things played out to get to this point.

If you have a problem with the autobots that upvote me, then have a problem with the autobots that upvote EVERYONE on the platform. Then you're actually thinking rationally to resolve the problem.

I'm the problem because there are autobots voting for me? What? Are you retarded? If you have a problem with the bots, then the problem is the bots, not the people who create content.

Get rid of the bots, for everyone, and then there will only be manual curators giving out rewards from the reward pool. Then that's more fair, maybe? But at least there will be no more bots for ignorant people to blame on content creators. LOL. Learn to discern. You can't even see things clearly when you blame someone who posts content, for getting upvoted by bots. Highly irrational argument and false perception of reality.

As usual, the typical derision of accurately describing what is actually happening in reality is being done by those who can't see what is happening. And then they start with their dismissive labels: "you're just complaining, whining, pathetic, etc."

Yes, when you talk about issues and target people's behavior, they will deny their behavior has any issue, turn around and tell you how "wrong" you are and how "bad it is for the community" to actually bring up issues about what they are doing. They play the "tu quoque" fallacy card to point to you while they ignore, deny, dismiss, deflect and avoid dealing with their own behavior. Few seem to want to understand the issue from a root causal source.

I'm the problem when it's bots voting me?
I'm the one posting too much?
I'm the one creating problems where the are none?
I'm the one whining about not making money?

No. Nice try to conflate the issue with your fallacy reasoning.

I made my case about how people are not flagging with any actual criteria, definition, or reason that can be explained. I asked for a definition of what "whale swarming", "whale concentration", and "over rewarded" what, what #'s, what criteria, and was told it's whatever anyone wants to make up in the fantasy of their self-delusion to mean whatever they want it to mean. And no one sees a problem with that lunacy? So I exposed how it's not consistent and irrational. Set the rules for how this works, otherwise there are no rules and you're just doing this any which way you want without any rational mindset to do it.

Is $X payout too high? Then flag everyone above $X payout. Then you're not a hypocrite because your code of conduct is consistently being applied to flag everyone above a certain $X payout. Otherwise, when you flag someone at $30 when others are above $100, then you're an inconsistent and irrational hypocrite.

I will keep making posts on these issues, and other Steemit issues and things to talk about, until people start facing the reality of the problem, and those who are the problem actually face themselves in the mirror instead of projecting irrational nonsense onto those who bring up these issues.

So keep watching for BS like "you're just whining", "you're just complaining", "you're hurting the community", "you're selfish", "you're not kind", "you just want more money for yourself", "you don't engage in comments on you posts", "you don't upvote your commenters".

I made the case, with data, facts, about how flags are not rationally being applied, based on content itself not being judged to determine the level of reward it has. It's just looking at the rewards, or looking at who posted, or looking at who upvoted, and then it's "too much rewards, flag", but no actual criteria to determine if this is being done rationally or not.

I even showed that when I did, original higher quality, text, graphics, audio and video, and it dared to go above $100, you started to flag me with you're BS about how it added no value to Steemit and didn't help new users sign up? What a lame brain idiotic justification to flag that content. So I try to do better, original quality work, and it gets thrown down, while I do unoriginal less quality work and it gets more rewards, int he same damn day! And you still don't see the problem? Well, I just go to lesser quality, going to the lowest common denominator like in communism, lowering the amount of higher quality original work I do because when I dare to do it and it gets rewarded... you just shit all over it with irrational justifications.

Keep flagging away douche-bag bad whales. Keep being irrational, inconsistent, and hypocritical. Until then, you won't get me to stop calling out your self-deluded behavior. When you change and stop your BS, I'll stop calling you out. OK? I'm only doing this in consequence of your BS behavior. Set up some criteria and rules for how flags are applied, because I have shown with facts/data, how what you're doing isn't being applied in any rational way for others to understand what, why and how you're doing it. Get you're head out of your asses and deal with your BS. Stop projecting it onto me as the "whiner", "complainer", etc. For those who know about logical fallacies, they can see through your deluded attempts to deflect any responsibility on your behalf.

What am I responsible to do?
Am I not allowed to post 4 time a day like is allowed? No.
Am I not allowed to get upvoted by others, like bots? No.
Am I not allowed to do lower quality work because my higher quality work gets flagged when it gets rewarded more than my lower quality work? No.
Am I obliged to reply on every single comment someone does on my content? No.
Am I obliged to vote for every post on the platform? No.
Am I obliged to do whatever you think I need to do in your deluded irrationality? No.

I already said fine, flag the psots that are highly rewarded that isn't my original work, that isn't higher quality, that is references from other sources. But this ALL started with my original, higher quality work on consciousness that many people appreciated. Then it keep going to two other original quality work on morality, and each time it got above a certain payout, it got flagged for BS irrational reasons, while my lower quality work goes higher and doesn't get flagged.

I tried to just do my thing, and I became "successful". But now my success is turning on me, so I can;t keep silent when I'm being targeted with irrational, inconsistent and hypocritical behavior by the some of the big powerful Steemit user accounts.


source

But few of the readers going through how I'm calling out this crap are bothering to even read the post and understand what is being said, so then they join in the self-deluded bullshit and try to target me when all I did was post content, that got rewarded, and am calling out the irrational flagging that targets my original higher quality work from the start whenever it dares to get higher rewards than my lower quality less significant work. And then there are others who get rewarded higher yet don't get flagged. There are no rules, guide, standard, criteria or definition for how it works, and that's a problem I tried to get an answer for but was told irrational BS once more. It's irrational.

If all you want to do is not read, not understand, then keep posting your bullshit comments and flag away, never understanding what is going on. Ignorance is bliss isn't it?

So here is a "decline payout" post, does that make you happy everyone trying to bring me down? Because you can't get rewarded on a post for bringing up serious issues in the platform?... LMAO. Fuck off.

Peace.

Sort:  

Well, you're one of my favorite users. I enjoy reading your content and It's obvious you work a lot. I hope you are rewarded for that because you deserve it. You have many auto bots because you consistently deliver. Obviously, If you decided to make a series of low quality posts, many of the followers wouldn't notice and you'd be rewarded anyway but, as you stated, that's not your problem. It's the bot's problem. Without so many bots the Steemit ecosystem would be more or less auto regulating. Bots are a good idea but at the same time they may unsettle the system because of some unfairness they bring. I don't think the whole vigilante thing flagging to keep the rewards low is a good idea because it's like fighting an objective unfairness (bots biased work) with a subjective unfairness (flagger's opinion).
I believe when you have a piece of fertile land (Steemit) you should let the best seeds (Krnel and others) develop and grow, if they are not breaking the laws of nature. Obviously, that are very specific cases that may justify alternative solutions, like Steemsports, for instance. If some users are becoming so good (due to their work) they are seen as a menace to the majority, they should be offered a solution and not a bag full of flags.
I think in time this will all end well, it's just a matter of adjustments.

good talk :) hope more can listen I got too caught up with the bs below, at least you said it calmly and framed it nicely :) I also like the analogy and like to make it with the ground and growth. grass bushes and trees and oaks if you will :D better than whales and all the jazz, that way we can cut trees for steem :D getting off topic :| but I have nothing to add. maybe well we just have to see where it goes and where we can take it

Haha, a good one!

LOL - that's pretty funny. If you read his articles before, which I assume you did and you are just being amusing, which is one of the things I like about you, I believe he is declining payment so they can't say that is his motivation for these posts.

vote on comments and earn as authors, curation is bs anyways :D

I don't understand any of this. I typically make about $1.00 per post (averaged out). The only way I can make ANY money is to post a lot. Also I would think that if you want your platform to become popular, you should encourage people to use it. For example, if Fakebook limited posts to 3-4 per day, they wouldn't have 100 users! But, I'm old and what do I know anyway!!!

Correct. I started with only 1 post each day, or not even. Then my higher quality original work of more importance wasn't too popular, so I lowered my quality of information and started to do newsy soft posts and more people liked those. Now my more important info gets to reach more people because I lowered my standards and put out more posts to get more attention from the "attention economy". But legitimate success by working at it breads jealousy and hatred it seems. Keep posting your 4 posts each day, that'w how you will potentially get more visibility and more whales to support you.

Thanks...your advice is always spot on! Someone told me if you post more than 4 times in 24 hrs. they take away rewards. I don't know if this is true or not, but doesn't make any sense!

If you post more yes. If you make 0 rewards, nothing to take away. But if you make $10 on 4 posts total, then 5th posts will decrease those 4 other posts rewards, and 6th more so, etc. Was to avoid abuse of posting posts just to try to make money and getting them voted on, which will be back int he next HardFork where many things are just "open the gates" ... lol

I told you that about the 24 hours and it is true, but as @krnel indicated that is supposedly going to be removed on the next hard fork.

Thanks, I couldn't remember who told me... It's the old age thing you know!

I guess it's time to start I've spending too much time spread too thin for no real purpose. People are blind and I expect them to read between lines, they don't even know what decency is. But yea, btw any hopes of a hard fork softening, like keeping the limit of posts. or smth there should be discussions ad interactions. The flag wars are boring the crap out of me and draining productive hours

Being treated like this is absolutely maddening! I've experienced something similar offline in real life. I wonder what the solution would be - like a flag review board or something?

Yes, that has been discussed, mentioned to @dan @dantheman in past comments, by me and others. A review of trusted members in the community, possibly voted on like witnesses. That would require criteria, and rules, like I have been asking. That's what this is trying to get at, because when I asked these irrational bully whales for how it works, they just say it works how ever they want it to work. Brilliant isn't it? We're going to get far with that attitude! Thanks for the feedback.

This is why we can't have nice things.

If people have a problem with you. Tell them to go have a coke and a smile and stfu.

Side note, this would be hard to implement broadly, but could be done easily per client, i.e. on steemit.com

Get rid of the bots, for everyone, and then there will only be manual curators giving out rewards from the reward pool. Then that's more fair, maybe? But at least there will be no more bots for ignorant people to blame on content creators.

I should not be allowed to post 4 times a day, because you say so?
I should not be allowed to post the type of content I want, because you say so?

People should not be allowed to use their own stake, which is their own property, the way they see fit, because you say so?

looking at your account i dont see any flaggings.

maybe you would have a diff tune if you were on the other side of the equation lol

To be fair, though, even with the flags, krnel makes more money here than me.

But I mean, of course, I'm not going to lie. Who likes getting flagged? No one. I wouldn't and don't like it. But what can you do about it? Complaining about it won't change anything. There's nothing you can do, flagging is a feature here and every user has the right to use it.

Just like any user can upvote any post, any user can downvote any post. It's how the system works.

I think this is just a good example of why Steemit should never function as a main source of income. It's a bad idea, based solely on how the system functions. Anyone can nuke your post at any given time, and no amount of whining will take away the right of high staked users to do so.

I don't stress about payouts that much due to the fact that I have an actual job, which pays my bills. Steemit is a (sometimes, though currently less so, with all the drama going on) fun hobby.

I think krnel should just be happy about the fact that his posts are still highly successful, even when he has two high staked users disagreeing with his rewards. His fanbase is still big enough to earn him rewards.

If @smooth and @berniesanders nuked my posts, they would make exactly $0.00.

Curators don't make money for down votes. So nuking a post (anyones) pays them nothing.

It is more about them either saying "I don't like it", "I don't like the title, didn't read the rest", "@dan voted on it so I'm going to down vote it", or "It is making too, nuch but my buddy over here I like posting the simple stuff, every one of his posts are gold and worth thousands"

Yes that last one happened. That's what gets a lot of us. Hypocrisy.

@smooth for example. I don't really agree with his use of the flag at times, but I don't speak badly about him for a couple of reasons. He is not hypocritical about it. He is vague at times, but not a hypocrite. (as far as I can tell) Another reason is he will reason with people rather than calling them an idiot. I also don't know that I've caught him saying he down voted something without reading it. Has he done any of these things? Perhaps, but if he has I have not seen them.

He is voting how he wants, and I do think it is a negative. Yet he doesn't make up excuses and then do actions that make those excuses totally hypocritical.

@personz did have something worth perhaps trying to negate some of the negative impact of the down vote. New people have a bot flag them once with explanations on how to look up who down voted you, so you can see if it was a bot or not, and to explain that there can be people that believe your article has "no value" and don't care if that can be really hurtful to someone. Basically a bot to try to prepare them early on so we have less people that it happens to that don't know why, and get depressed, leave, talk about it on FB, Youtube, Reddit (doubt that, as it is far more aggressive there), etc.

It might help some. It is the people that have been silenced or ran off by this, and the people who don't come here because of this that motivates my responses.

yeah newbies are taking the brunt since they haven't had the time to get the thick skin, and the winds blow strong from time to time, I remember not even knowing what polo was, seemed like a shady bank of steem for me people just feeding it cash, :D

but spend enough time and there is no problem, around 2-3 months of activity is enough

Well someone that was up beat and has been around for a lot longer than that said she thinks she'll stop for a bit. It is pretty harsh.

Also as to me going after Bernie. I tend to always chime in on these flagging posts. I generally do not name a specific person until they step forward and engage me. My big post came after Bernie decided to throw insults and ad hominems my way. He didn't read that. He admits to not reading quite a few things he down votes. I really don't ever believe he is likely to change. Let's just say it is not very probable (leaving a rare chance it happens), but others besides him I think there is still a chance they might start to get how their short term goal they think is positive likely has long term goals that are a much bigger negative than what they thought they were stopping. I do not believe most of them are doing it for malicious reasons.

Yet there are consequences... When you are powerful enough you are flying above the land you might not see so clearly the perspective of those as a lower altitude when you swoop down to do what you consider a correction, but your target and others view it as an attack.

Are they both right? From their own perspectives yes.

When it comes to PR and marketing, perception is all that matters.

I think its safe to say OP will only reply to comments already on his side of the issue.

When did he say that asshole? Where did he make that argument asshole? Did he say that people should not be allowed to use their own stake the way they see fit? Is that what you read, read it again before arguing that ridiculous thing, Tu Quoque/ Nos Quoque ?
As if people need reasons to do anything, you can mindlessly do whatever the fuck you want asshole, you can mindlessly argue that people should do mindless things but don't try to argue that he is saying they shouldn't use their own stake however they want if you want a intelligible answer to that question, because you don't give a fuck about reason or justification, you are arguing against reason and justification, so fuck off with your bullshit.

haha silenced :D

keep posting cuz i enjoy your posts

Fuck haters carry on, make a million, good luck to you.

And the minnows said . . . U N I T E
minnowsUNITE.gif

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.18
TRX 0.13
JST 0.029
BTC 57883.59
ETH 3070.40
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.34