If someone is policing the community it should be done by Germans. We have a lot of instinct for order and justice. Most likely the whole thing would get hijacked by some Austrian guy again tho...
Ja, setzt euch doch bitte auch mal mit für Anti-Abuse ein... (finanziell und zeitlich)
Sehe nur die Selben Leute, welche sich seit immer (sogar noch zu Steem Zeiten) für Anti-Abuse einsetzen.
Würdet ihr euch auch mal einsetze, von eurer freien Zeit und mit euren HP - dann bräuchten wir gar keine Hivewatchers extra zahlen (wir Anti-Abuse Leute haben auch so unsere Probleme mit denen seit Jahren, können es aber auch nicht ändern - sind halt zu wenige)
Ihr wollt Dezentralität jedoch nichts dafür machen, "Gewinne" (Müll Karten & Tokens) jedoch nicht mal für ordentliche Posts Mühe machen - macht sogar noch bei Spam/ jahrelangen Aussaugen der Plattform mit, anstatt sich mal selbst anzustrengen, auf Almosen Gewinne hoffen?
Und wäre es dem Denno wirklich um Unterstützung (also er unterstützt andere) gegangen, würde er sich nicht sofort verabschieden, nachdem nach JAHREN mal ein paar überbewertete "Rewards" ausfallen ^^^^
Er braucht doch keine Rewards um mit seiner HP zu unterstützen ? Hat doch bereits selbst genug bekommen.
Wird Zeit dass sich die Rewards wirklich auf mehr kleinere Accounts (wenn sie sich nun anstrengen, ihre Chance sehen statt rumzuheulen) aufteilen.
anstatt sich mal selbst anzustrengen, auf Almosen Gewinne hoffen?
Beim Thema Almosen solltest du ganz leise sein. Ich hab dir mal 10 HBD geschickt als ich einen Post von dir gelesen hab in dem du um Geld gebeten hast, obwohl ich dich damals so wie jetzt kaum kenne/kannte. Als nächsten Post durfte ich dann eine Beschwerde lesen, dass zu wenig Leute gespendet haben.
wie wäre es, alle selbstvotes, alle curation trails und alles was zum betrug nutzbar ist ab zu schaffen? dann bleibt schon mal nur noch spam und doppelaccounts! aber wer entscheidet was spam ist? ein gewinnspiel was täglich läuft, ist kein spam. wenn es anderen usern spaß macht daran teil zu nehmen und sie freiwillig voten, ist es doch genau das, was hier gefördert werden sollte . wenn der user die votes dazu nutzt, anderen zu helfen, was man ja ganz einfach nachvollziehen kann, so nutzt er weder etwas zum eigenen vorteil, noch betrügt. punkt! und noch etwas. wer beleidigt, anstatt sachlich zu diskutieren, ist immer im unrecht ;-) hier hat sich nämlich langsam eine moralpolizei entwickelt, die entgegen der community handelt, denn wenn ein paar wenige entscheiden, was richtig und falsch ist, dann sind wir beim kommunismus angelangt.
erkläre mir, wo der unterschied bei mir liegt. ob ich auf youtube, oder twitch, oder dlive, oder vimm meinen stream veröffentliche und beim dem "beitrag" user freiwillig voten können. warum wird mir dann eigennutz vorgeworden, obwohl ich noch nie einen cent aus hive abgehoben habe und zumindest per fanbase täglich mehrere votes an andere verteile... wieso kann einer darüber entscheiden, dass das unrecht ist und alles auf 0 voten? wieso muss ich auf seinen willen hin bei anderen kommentieren, obwohl ich das überhaupt nicht möchte, da ich lieber mit usern im stream rede! mit welchem recht? und seine letzten worte waren, ihm gefällt mein content nicht... mir gefällt seiner auch nicht, deswegen vote ich aber niht auf 0 unabhängig davon, dass ich das aufgrund meines accounts ja auch nicht kann. das ist nichts anderes als meinungsdiktatur und machtausspielung.
Yes, why don't you join us in the effort for anti-abuse... (financially and in terms of time)
I only see the same people who have always (even in Steem times) contributed to anti-abuse.
If you would also use your free time and your HP - then we wouldn't have to pay extra for hivewatchers (we anti-abuse people have also had our problems with them for years, but we can't change it either - there are just too few of us -> so a need for hivewatchers).
You don't want to do anything for decentralisation, but you don't even want to make an effort for proper posts - you even participate in spam/years of sucking the platform dry instead of making an effort yourselves, hoping for little crap "wins"?
And if Denno was really interested in support (i.e. he supports others), he wouldn't immediately say goodbye after a few overvalued "rewards" are cancelled after YEARS ^^^^
He doesn't need rewards to support others with his HP? He's already got enough himself.
It's about time that the rewards are really distributed to more smaller accounts (if they make an effort and see their chance instead of whining now).
well you critized something else so let me respond to that.
I dont mind organisation. I think well organising something and giving people a payment or reward for their effort is not a bad thing. Organsiation is not in conflict with decentralisation and not even anarchism itself - at least not on a principle level.
Im also not against the Wild West solution, where everybody flags and even common folks downvote stuff they think is overrated/overpayed. I would make a morning routine out of downvoting 90% of the trending page and I would have a jolly time doing so. Even though I actually think this would be the best solution Im surely not the one who will try to make it trend.
Ordnung is not the basis for freedom, but rather Austrian jackboot fetishists. There does need to be order, but rather the order of the Goths than Romans. Freedom of speech has created the longest enduring societies the world has ever seen, starting millennia ago with the expansion of the Yamnaya that burst out of the steppes by inventing dairy and the economic advantage that provided.
Such invention is only facilitated by free speech, and demonstrates that it is free speech that is far more valuable than mere money.
It is that supposed principles are being constantly contradicted, which are first proclaimed loudly and proudly and then broken with a downvote for not being able to stomach insults or differentiating opinions. On whim.
When I opened my Steemit account it was advertised with "you get paid to blog" and with "free speech", their unique selling points.
However, it cannot credibly advertise itself and later Hive as such, as free speech is prevented here just as it is elsewhere. Not through downvotes per se, but by promoting mainstream content. What you see on trending is what counts and is consumed mostly.
Since no clear set of rules is communicated centrally, there are no clear rules. For example, you have to get to know HW before you know what function it fulfils.
For me, Hive is an example of what happens when you create a space where people who have nothing to do with each other try their hand at politics. Since there are no familial, local or business relationships between them, the only currency is the attention currency. If you're not conjuring up the end of the world (extreme on one side) or drawing a utopia (extreme on the other), you remain a barely read user. Which I do not mind personally (IF I have a steady readership of a handful of people) but that's how online-activity seems to be understood.
Everything else is mediocre entertainment as a matter of fact.
People say that every user has to be a plagiarism/spam police. But the fact is that most people don't want to do that, which is understandable when you put into perspective how much time it takes to do just that.
The ludicrous thing about the situation is that if someone posts spam in large quantities, the payouts first have to be visible in order to be noticed, for example trending. But if they now appear on the trending page, it means that they already have high payouts. I would say that spam usually doesn't trend, but then spam is hard to find. So it's just a coincidence if you come across a spammer account.
I wouldn't downvote a spammer if I come across one, since it cannot be done by just one glimpse and then push a button. So you need a police. Who then reports violation to a mature committee, who then contacts the suspect, who then have a talk, who then clear the case. All of it must be transparent and not behind the scenes, as you rightly pointed out. The payment for the police and the committee must be worth the time and work invested. The documentation of the executives must be well written and thoroughly done by the best standards. The police ought not be the judges, only the ones who refer supposedly spammers and plagiarists to the committee.
Since "spam" isn't crystal clear either, some whales downvote posts that simply have a picture plus a little text as spam. Opinions can be divided here.
The users then complain because countless of them actually have no awareness at all that what they publish maybe regarded as totally unimportant rubbish. Only when you get to know a user do you begin to understand what their "one picture plus two lines" could mean. For example with antisocialist.
But of course, there ARE just rubbish postings who could as well be AI-supported content. One never knows before one does not engage on a one-on-one basis. So I would say people are not payed for their content but for being known (becoming acquainted to each other) through engagement over a longer course of time. It's relational.
If someone is not interested at all in building a relation towards his audience, it can mean (but not for sure) that he gives a damn. But you never know. Sometimes people want to share what they find important in an open space. And, as you say, value free speech more than payout. But it can't be helped, since the payout is in the first place what generates attention. So, free speech is linked to high payouts.
I have often experienced the politicians on this platform (witnesses) saying that they really don't want to debate with every single user, which is "exactly why downvotes and upvotes are distributed". But that's still what they should and are expected to do, as they are perceived as politicians and set themselves up as such.
But if you are in such a mood that you don't really want to have anything to do with the tedious work of a politician because it is supposedly enough to press buttons, you end up with a user base that presses buttons. The whole design is geared towards button-pushing and because of this, witnesses refuse to do anything other than push buttons. They justify it by saying that it saves time and the statement itself is enough for people to find buttons pressed on their post, representing either a thumbs up or a thumbs down. The whole nature of the algorithm is geared towards this.
"Saving time" and automating the very processes in which people actually can come to an understanding towards each other, is an illusion. Time cannot be saved, since conflict cannot be avoided. Avoiding conflict means to push buttons instead of debating.
It's an illusion to think that pushing buttons represent engagement since it doesn't. So, they can be believed in saying that they don't want to debate with every single user. But then, they cannot place a downvote either, if they refuse to talk to that specific user who received their downvote. That is a contradiction. They are expected to invest personal time and arguments. If they don't like it, they cannot be a witness, and should remove themselves from the witness list.
One person cannot talk to many people at the same time, that's true. Each individual can only have a conversation with a handful of people. If you violate this insight, you succumb to the misconception that this truth can be replaced by pressing buttons. It can't.
Total waste of money.
They drive away good users in their pursuit of policing.
Badly operated.
Bad communication.
Terrible people skills.
Total waste of money.
At $350 per day we could be running marketing campaigns.
Advertising.
Community contests.
so what are you ideas on how the community does anti-abuse without hivewatchers?
will you do it?
it is just a handful voluntary people - the same since half a decade - who contribute their free time for hive anti-abuse (even countered harmful flags from flag wars @freezepeach) - and got no payment
we also do not like Hivewatchers, but they at least do something, where the big community does not care for itself..
If it's voluntary why is it costing $350 a day??? Where is the money going.
I have no problem with countering abuse but i've seen HW drive away regular users by targeting them with downvotes for stupid reasons.
No explanation, no warning and no talking to them.
A proper set up would have an account with delegated HP for downvotes.
A specific reporting structure with a list of offences. Standardized so it's clear when and why a person is infringing on the community.
Report an infringement to the team.
First a friendly warning and show them where the problem lies.
If still breaking guidelines a small downvote maybe 10% of the reward.
If persistent offending then increase the downvote but a clear and specific structure on how it would work with open channels of communication.
I have no problem with a person being paid to run a service like this but it needs to be ran as a proper full time service and professionally done not just throwing downvotes around the place and refusing to interact with people in a proper way.
I've been here 7 years myself and have seen a lot over that time. I was targeted by whales back in the early days and almost driven off the platform with downvotes. They should be used sparingly and only for real abuse. Downvotes are harmful and have driven away a lot of users over the past 7 years.
Since 2017, when I joined the community, more than 1M accounts have joined and began posting and then been flagged off the platform. HW was not useful against the bidbots, but the community itself got rid of them when enabled to do so by tweaking DV code. Rather than fund an institution that can be - and obviously has been - corrupted to profit from attacking that ~1M users and censoring their speech on Hive, the community itself is competent to protect itself when availed the tools, as the demise of bidbots, that threatened to utterly overwhelm the platform at one point, reveals.
HW has become a tool of oppression, of censorship profiteering, and has proven the mechanism of funding is incapable of withstanding corruption and abuse. You cannot call the people of HW 'voluntary' when they're getting $350/day, which would be better spent to oppose censorship than cause it.
It is not factually correct to say the 'big community' does not care for itself. The reduction of the influence of the bidbots has proved the community does care for itself when armed to do so. The problem is that venal profiteers rise to power in a plutocracy, and Hive is a pure plutocracy in which several of the most egregious bidbotters have become entrenched in the oligarchy of top witnesses.
The solution is to fund @freezepeach and allow spam, scams, and plagiarists to be flagged by the community that has demonstrated it's willingness to do so when availed the tools in the code to do so. $350/day would go a long ways to ending opinion flagging that has cost us >1M users already, and created a stench of outrage against that injudicial censorship in the cryptosphere. That can be reversed, and free speech empowered, by coding proper tools for the community to protect itself, and funding @freezepeach to oppose opinion flagging - or Hive is doomed by it's prior (and present) flaggotry, because that reeking stench of censorship will not wash off.
I don't think Hive is doomed, because even the worst stench will wash away when time and the application of cleansing is applied, and people are suffering the censorship across the social mediascape more than ever. HW is the reason people keep trying to use web2 platforms, instead of flocking to Hive to be rewarded for speaking forthrightly. Social media has become the largest financial sector of the IRL markets in the world. Hive has been extremely poorly executed to perform so dismally in a market so obviously profitable and malevolently censored. We have a rhetorical foundation to directly reward creators for their forthright content that clearly has the ability to be extremely financially rewarding if executed properly, but instead has performed worse than the most oppressive Big Social platforms. It has performed worse than them by BEING worse than them for creators, and HW opinion flagging is what is worse.
Fund @freezepeach instead of HW, and allow the community to handle it's business censoring spam, scams, and plagiarism, as it has clearly proved it is capable of doing when it suppressed the bidbots. While there are still at least one bidbot in operation today, it is no longer a threat to the whole community, while HW has shown to be worse, and more insidious threat by crushing forthright speakers and causing them to abandon the platform. HW is so malignant that Fakebook and Twatter are better prospects, and that is a horrible fact of the misapplication of funds and code on Hive today.
I was going to say hard to say with a deterrence effect, but then seeing 12 HBD being sent to them hourly ( https://peakd.com/@hivewatchers/wallet) from the hive fundation , with very little hive power, and then dumping it into a savings on a dummy account with $77k HBD (https://peakd.com/@nuttin/wallet ) I think it is obviously no at this point.
I think they can be self sustaining without needing to be subsidized further and the training wheels can be taken off. Assuming they own the nuttin account, and the apr is 20%, that's still 42 hbd a day. If they continue to get 290hbd a day and the 42 from interest, then this time next year, it could be 110 hbd a day in interest.
In closing:
1.) Much better case for delegating HP or RC to projects than giving hbd. The foundation gets to keep its resources, and the dev can still use the HP/RC as needed.
2.) I think the 20% apr is ridiculous myself; that it is a ticking time bomb.
Except when they do stuff off chain, which bad actors with above room temperature IQ will do.
This is why HW uses Discord to arrange the humiliation ritual people have to endure to get off the blacklist. Bad actors do what bad actors do, and HW does this off chain so you can't see it.
I fail to see how. That barely keeps pace with inflation, IMHO. In fact, I don't think it does. Better minds than mine, to wit Edicted, have thoroughly detailed why 20% interest on HBD savings are not any kind of threat to Hive, and you could have a look at his catalog to see his posts about it.
However, I agree with the statements you make about HW. Frankly, as long as they're opinion flagging I reckon they're Hive's enemy that is preventing the price of Hive from mooning. Without free speech, Hive is without value whatsoever. Whales flagging creators for their opinions reeks worse than skunkwater, and we should be supporting the victims of that censorship as I do with donations that cannot be flagged away so that the censors give up.
I, and I'm sure you also, want Hive to be a better platform for free speech than fakebook or twatter, that egregiously censor. Hive isn't a better platform for free speech or it would eclipse those platforms, and the only reason it isn't is opinion flags like those HW flies on content creators that aren't spammers, scammers, or plagiarists.
Of more concern to me is that the definition of abuse keeps expanding, while with each expansion they claim it was always in the definition and always part of their scope.
The more the definition of abuse is expanded, the more it gets into areas that should be up to broader consensus, not a centrally funded effort. And the more users and communities are alienated.
It is my opinion that the lost market value from decent people leaving Hive and selling out their holdings exceeds the 'saved' value from HW's abuse elimination by orders of magnitude.
The definition is whatever they feel like for the day. They refuse to do anything about the 100 accounts grampo farms with like cleangirl. Also remember they were one of the largest self vote abusers before they got their golden ticket by upvoting 60-90 comments a day for $1-2 each while downvoting people who did the same.
Hive Watchers had been already downvoting "cleangirl" account months before your "buildawhale" account started downvoting it.
The same with this group ("buildawhale started DV-ing a few of them):
alena-deryabina
alexwo
beardmen
cwoong
dasunkwo
estarda
flodareltih
fozzy
francuzzz
goshy
huanan
ien
imaran
immortal8000
iotman
logmen
pixelpenguin
qazaq
sobaken763
wekin
yarrik
Since we noticed that "buildawhale" started downvotuing some of them on day 6, we stopped downvoting those accounts downvoted by "buildawhale".
I think that system is too automated. I see too many cases of a person doing one sketchy thing and then get rewarded with a lifetime of downvotes, even months after having changed their act. I really don't feel that the cost to the DHF is in proportion to the benefits delivered.
I've seen and heard of enough cases where non-abusive behavior or simple mistakes were crushed by HW, especially for new accounts, to vote NO on this poll.
It is clear that exactly such elements have arisen to take advantage of the funding availed HW, and are harming the Hive community profitably. Wherever governance is undertaken, such malign actors seek to gain whatever power and wealth is expended for their own aggrandizement, not just on Hive, but everywhere and always.
HW needs to go. It is demonstrable that just replacing bad apples will not make the barrel rotten apple proof. As long as there's an apple barrel, rotten apples will lie and cheat to spoil it. I'm confident that backdoor deals are passing funds unseen to advance goals of bad actors, and the visible financial expenditures for HW are but part of the actual sums involved, as graft is a constant hazard of corruptible institutions.
Better for the community and it's rightful forthright expression of it's concerns and exposure of hazards we need to be informed of would be a mechanism to support posts and posters that are wrongfully flagged, IMHO. Profiteers gain no benefit from strengthening the community against such Mammon Hunters, but rather from institutions like HW that attack the community and prey on our number. We should cut them off and stop funding attacks on us, and instead fund armor against their attacks on us that profiteering plutocrats constantly seek to profitably employ to take our wealth for themselves.
When observing actual hives in nature, there are no bees running around destroying the comb and taking the honey. The hive builds the comb, and the honey provides for their entire community. That is the kind of work that should be funded, not destruction of free speech, but protection of it.
the only reason im on hive is to stream. but one dude doesnt like my videos so he is flagging them since 1.5 years. im not here for writing stupid things or post one picture from a tree. But im not allowed to do what i want and like. instead one guy uses his power to dictate what i have to do.... it's like communism here
No, that is a total waste. Hivewatchers are the boil of the platform. Instead of punishing their users, take the money and distribute it to really good contributions and ideas that also advance the platform.
They have no reasons to care, because there are no rewards for objectionable speech. Instead the Hive code creates a plutocracy by curation rewards enabling circle jerks.
Hive could create proper incentives by properly valuing free speech. Social media is the largest financial sector in the world, and it has only arisen in the last decade or so. Clearly Hive could be coded to properly take advantage of this, however, the oligarchy prefers to maintain their fangs buried into our life's blood and their power to rule the little pond.
Either Hive will revise it's code to value free speech above all else, or someone else will.
Saying anything doesn't work in 'their' favor.
Taking a position might cost 'them' politically.
'They' also think of us as 'them'.
This kind of thinking doesn't help.
There is less butter on 'our' side of the bread.
For now.
'They' should be expected to act as expected, by the one with the most butter.
Crapitalism makes 'us' 'all' whores.
Living under the bridge is not all that attractive when you can sell something as cheap as your soul.
Funny thing, before they got their funding they were abusing more than anyone else self voting 60-90 comments a day for $1-2 while flagging others for doing the same thing for a couple cents.
"Total waste of money. They drive away good users in their pursuit of policing.
Badly operated. Bad communication. Terrible people skills. Total waste of money."
I do think that those who are getting proposal funding need to be accountable and justify what they get. There is no breakdown here. Hosting a site and some services will not be that expensive, but if people are working full time on this then they may expect to be paid. The proposal implies that they get something for their time.
I have seen so many complaints about HW, but then most people will not take any action against abuse. I think it would be much worse without HW or something similar. They have to be fair in how they treat people. We will get lots of people desperate to make money who get bad advice on how to do it here. I would rather see them guided to better behaviour than driven away as that leads to them spreading bad vibes. There are cases of organised abuse that can be tricky to track down. If we had a massive influx of users then things could quickly ramp up.
I've been involved in some other anti-abuse, but it can lead to threats and so most people stay anonymous. I have talked to HW people and they are not the power-crazed monsters that some portray them as. I can understand if they get stressed out. I know there are plenty of feuds between various Hivers that get pretty heated.
There is obvious an image problem with HW and we need to find compromises to improve that. The proposal funding needs to go where it does the most good, but that is really determined by the largest accounts. We have to find the right balance so that Hive can actually grow. Driving away new users can harm us all and the whales have the most to lose.
The main reason the proposal was raised like 300% was for a dev to redo their site, which as far as I have seen hasn't been done and it still doesn't even work. Their site is stupid simple too. Doesn't require $350/day, nor does fighting less than $20/day in abuse.
Yeah, the site has not changed in ages and is not great. As I understand it proposals are a binary thing so they either get the requested funding or not. Maybe they should have separate ones for running costs and for new developments.
I would rather see them guided to better behaviour than driven away as that leads to them spreading bad vibes.
All too true, and happened literally a million times already.
they are not the power-crazed monsters that some portray them as.
I have seen some screenshots from their discord that suggest otherwise. Absolutely reprehensible behaviour towards people that seek off the blacklist, and concede they will reform their ways.
Personally, I reckon they should conduct their business on chain, and not on discord. Hive business is not discord's, and discord is a malevolent surveillance device, and HW business should be on chain where everyone can see how they treat folks.
There is obvious an image problem with HW
It's not just an image. They opinion flag. It's utterly contrary to the purpose of Hive. They don't need to compromise. They need to quit censoring free speech and stick to their baileywick of censoring spam, scams, and plagiarism. They also should not be profiteering by self voting with funds from Hive. That's just scammy.
There are some nasty people around here, but also a lot who really care about Hive. Some will use their power to attack others. I just think that it's not as black and white as some make out.
Having centralized anti-abuse is not all bad, imo.
The question becomes is it profitable, both for the chain to redistribute it and the abusers.
Clearly the abusers are getting what they need, or they wouldn't do it.
So, now the question is how much total abuse is happening.
I got no problem financing some anti-abuse efforts but the the big picture is not being adequately illustrated.
How much abuse is happening outside trending?
Nobody can do anything about that abuse, at this point.
I don't think tying hw's compensation to the amount of redistribution is a good idea, and if the amount of abuse doesn't rise to the costs involved with centralized overhead, then some median would have to be arrived at by 'the community'.
Or, the plutocracy can decree whatever because they hodl the power.
That has 'worked' up to now because 'the community' has failed to reach an organizational power level adequate to change things.
I'd say if you don't like how hw's is doing it, then offer a viable alternative.
Until the community is ready to step up, organize, and replace the good that hw's does, I'd vote for keeping them.
Until 'the community' is ready to step up and stop the trending abuse, this is what we get, continued centralization of power.
@jarvie@asgarth can we get subscriptions to posts, ie allow notifications of comments by others on posts we opt to follow?
It's too easy to forget to come back two days later to see what other comments have come in, let alone comments that come in much later.
This feature would increase engagement, imo.
"...the plutocracy can decree whatever because they hodl the power."
The Hive code needs to value free speech above all else, and deprecate mere financial concerns. Most of all, it needs to not be a pure plutocracy, because IRL is proof of how that turns out.
Hey Steemcleaners, why are you flagging this comment? You have been flagging this author for YEARS, despite he posts original content DAILY.
You, Steemcleaners, are the problem that has kept Hive from outcompeting Fakebook and Twatter by rewarding content creators such as @por500bolos, because you chase them off the platform.
That account is just what HW uses when they don't have a justified reason to downvote anything.
It pays to have idiots delegate and die off somewhere so they get to keep the free stake. But, don't you dare ask for delegations expiring like the way witness votes do.
Knock knock... ERROR: Joke failed. @bpcvoter3, You need more $LOLZ to use this command. The minimum requirement is 0.0 LOLZ. You can get more $LOLZ on HE.
There isn't enough information to vote on this poll. At face value, it's not worth it. However, how much abuse would the platform suffer if they didn't do their "job"? That is the real question. Can this even be quantified?
An issue that I have with the proposal from @hivewatchers is that it does not break down the costs. How much is spent on its infrastructure, labor, etc? I would like to see specifics.
I get that. In my opinion, we cannot quantify the amount of "abuse" that would happen on top of what already does. The current cost/benefit is not worth it if your numbers are accurate.
I think there is enough room for Hivewatchers to improve their proccess and better explaining to us how and why they do their thing.
I've been always against downvoting, mainly to prevent wars between users. I do agree that hivewatchers uses downvoting as a tool to clean the space, nothing more, nothing less.
I would like to see more info on how they distribute funding.
As I said above, more dialog witth community would enlighten people's view.
If someone is policing the community it should be done by Germans. We have a lot of instinct for order and justice. Most likely the whole thing would get hijacked by some Austrian guy again tho...
Ja, setzt euch doch bitte auch mal mit für Anti-Abuse ein... (finanziell und zeitlich)
Sehe nur die Selben Leute, welche sich seit immer (sogar noch zu Steem Zeiten) für Anti-Abuse einsetzen.
Würdet ihr euch auch mal einsetze, von eurer freien Zeit und mit euren HP - dann bräuchten wir gar keine Hivewatchers extra zahlen (wir Anti-Abuse Leute haben auch so unsere Probleme mit denen seit Jahren, können es aber auch nicht ändern - sind halt zu wenige)
Ihr wollt Dezentralität jedoch nichts dafür machen, "Gewinne" (Müll Karten & Tokens) jedoch nicht mal für ordentliche Posts Mühe machen - macht sogar noch bei Spam/ jahrelangen Aussaugen der Plattform mit, anstatt sich mal selbst anzustrengen, auf Almosen Gewinne hoffen?
Und wäre es dem Denno wirklich um Unterstützung (also er unterstützt andere) gegangen, würde er sich nicht sofort verabschieden, nachdem nach JAHREN mal ein paar überbewertete "Rewards" ausfallen ^^^^
Er braucht doch keine Rewards um mit seiner HP zu unterstützen ? Hat doch bereits selbst genug bekommen.
Wird Zeit dass sich die Rewards wirklich auf mehr kleinere Accounts (wenn sie sich nun anstrengen, ihre Chance sehen statt rumzuheulen) aufteilen.
Beim Thema Almosen solltest du ganz leise sein. Ich hab dir mal 10 HBD geschickt als ich einen Post von dir gelesen hab in dem du um Geld gebeten hast, obwohl ich dich damals so wie jetzt kaum kenne/kannte. Als nächsten Post durfte ich dann eine Beschwerde lesen, dass zu wenig Leute gespendet haben.
View more
wie wäre es, alle selbstvotes, alle curation trails und alles was zum betrug nutzbar ist ab zu schaffen? dann bleibt schon mal nur noch spam und doppelaccounts! aber wer entscheidet was spam ist? ein gewinnspiel was täglich läuft, ist kein spam. wenn es anderen usern spaß macht daran teil zu nehmen und sie freiwillig voten, ist es doch genau das, was hier gefördert werden sollte . wenn der user die votes dazu nutzt, anderen zu helfen, was man ja ganz einfach nachvollziehen kann, so nutzt er weder etwas zum eigenen vorteil, noch betrügt. punkt! und noch etwas. wer beleidigt, anstatt sachlich zu diskutieren, ist immer im unrecht ;-) hier hat sich nämlich langsam eine moralpolizei entwickelt, die entgegen der community handelt, denn wenn ein paar wenige entscheiden, was richtig und falsch ist, dann sind wir beim kommunismus angelangt.
erkläre mir, wo der unterschied bei mir liegt. ob ich auf youtube, oder twitch, oder dlive, oder vimm meinen stream veröffentliche und beim dem "beitrag" user freiwillig voten können. warum wird mir dann eigennutz vorgeworden, obwohl ich noch nie einen cent aus hive abgehoben habe und zumindest per fanbase täglich mehrere votes an andere verteile... wieso kann einer darüber entscheiden, dass das unrecht ist und alles auf 0 voten? wieso muss ich auf seinen willen hin bei anderen kommentieren, obwohl ich das überhaupt nicht möchte, da ich lieber mit usern im stream rede! mit welchem recht? und seine letzten worte waren, ihm gefällt mein content nicht... mir gefällt seiner auch nicht, deswegen vote ich aber niht auf 0 unabhängig davon, dass ich das aufgrund meines accounts ja auch nicht kann. das ist nichts anderes als meinungsdiktatur und machtausspielung.
View more
Yes, why don't you join us in the effort for anti-abuse... (financially and in terms of time)
I only see the same people who have always (even in Steem times) contributed to anti-abuse.
If you would also use your free time and your HP - then we wouldn't have to pay extra for hivewatchers (we anti-abuse people have also had our problems with them for years, but we can't change it either - there are just too few of us -> so a need for hivewatchers).
You don't want to do anything for decentralisation, but you don't even want to make an effort for proper posts - you even participate in spam/years of sucking the platform dry instead of making an effort yourselves, hoping for little crap "wins"?
And if Denno was really interested in support (i.e. he supports others), he wouldn't immediately say goodbye after a few overvalued "rewards" are cancelled after YEARS ^^^^
He doesn't need rewards to support others with his HP? He's already got enough himself.
It's about time that the rewards are really distributed to more smaller accounts (if they make an effort and see their chance instead of whining now).
well you critized something else so let me respond to that.
I dont mind organisation. I think well organising something and giving people a payment or reward for their effort is not a bad thing. Organsiation is not in conflict with decentralisation and not even anarchism itself - at least not on a principle level.
Im also not against the Wild West solution, where everybody flags and even common folks downvote stuff they think is overrated/overpayed. I would make a morning routine out of downvoting 90% of the trending page and I would have a jolly time doing so. Even though I actually think this would be the best solution Im surely not the one who will try to make it trend.
View more
LOL
Ordnung is not the basis for freedom, but rather Austrian jackboot fetishists. There does need to be order, but rather the order of the Goths than Romans. Freedom of speech has created the longest enduring societies the world has ever seen, starting millennia ago with the expansion of the Yamnaya that burst out of the steppes by inventing dairy and the economic advantage that provided.
Such invention is only facilitated by free speech, and demonstrates that it is free speech that is far more valuable than mere money.
Thanks!
Ordnung muss sein! :)
It is that supposed principles are being constantly contradicted, which are first proclaimed loudly and proudly and then broken with a downvote for not being able to stomach insults or differentiating opinions. On whim.
When I opened my Steemit account it was advertised with "you get paid to blog" and with "free speech", their unique selling points.
However, it cannot credibly advertise itself and later Hive as such, as free speech is prevented here just as it is elsewhere. Not through downvotes per se, but by promoting mainstream content. What you see on trending is what counts and is consumed mostly.
Since no clear set of rules is communicated centrally, there are no clear rules. For example, you have to get to know HW before you know what function it fulfils.
For me, Hive is an example of what happens when you create a space where people who have nothing to do with each other try their hand at politics. Since there are no familial, local or business relationships between them, the only currency is the attention currency. If you're not conjuring up the end of the world (extreme on one side) or drawing a utopia (extreme on the other), you remain a barely read user. Which I do not mind personally (IF I have a steady readership of a handful of people) but that's how online-activity seems to be understood.
Everything else is mediocre entertainment as a matter of fact.
People say that every user has to be a plagiarism/spam police. But the fact is that most people don't want to do that, which is understandable when you put into perspective how much time it takes to do just that.
The ludicrous thing about the situation is that if someone posts spam in large quantities, the payouts first have to be visible in order to be noticed, for example trending. But if they now appear on the trending page, it means that they already have high payouts. I would say that spam usually doesn't trend, but then spam is hard to find. So it's just a coincidence if you come across a spammer account.
I wouldn't downvote a spammer if I come across one, since it cannot be done by just one glimpse and then push a button. So you need a police. Who then reports violation to a mature committee, who then contacts the suspect, who then have a talk, who then clear the case. All of it must be transparent and not behind the scenes, as you rightly pointed out. The payment for the police and the committee must be worth the time and work invested. The documentation of the executives must be well written and thoroughly done by the best standards. The police ought not be the judges, only the ones who refer supposedly spammers and plagiarists to the committee.
Since "spam" isn't crystal clear either, some whales downvote posts that simply have a picture plus a little text as spam. Opinions can be divided here.
The users then complain because countless of them actually have no awareness at all that what they publish maybe regarded as totally unimportant rubbish. Only when you get to know a user do you begin to understand what their "one picture plus two lines" could mean. For example with antisocialist.
But of course, there ARE just rubbish postings who could as well be AI-supported content. One never knows before one does not engage on a one-on-one basis. So I would say people are not payed for their content but for being known (becoming acquainted to each other) through engagement over a longer course of time. It's relational.
If someone is not interested at all in building a relation towards his audience, it can mean (but not for sure) that he gives a damn. But you never know. Sometimes people want to share what they find important in an open space. And, as you say, value free speech more than payout. But it can't be helped, since the payout is in the first place what generates attention. So, free speech is linked to high payouts.
I have often experienced the politicians on this platform (witnesses) saying that they really don't want to debate with every single user, which is "exactly why downvotes and upvotes are distributed". But that's still what they should and are expected to do, as they are perceived as politicians and set themselves up as such.
But if you are in such a mood that you don't really want to have anything to do with the tedious work of a politician because it is supposedly enough to press buttons, you end up with a user base that presses buttons. The whole design is geared towards button-pushing and because of this, witnesses refuse to do anything other than push buttons. They justify it by saying that it saves time and the statement itself is enough for people to find buttons pressed on their post, representing either a thumbs up or a thumbs down. The whole nature of the algorithm is geared towards this.
"Saving time" and automating the very processes in which people actually can come to an understanding towards each other, is an illusion. Time cannot be saved, since conflict cannot be avoided. Avoiding conflict means to push buttons instead of debating.
It's an illusion to think that pushing buttons represent engagement since it doesn't. So, they can be believed in saying that they don't want to debate with every single user. But then, they cannot place a downvote either, if they refuse to talk to that specific user who received their downvote. That is a contradiction. They are expected to invest personal time and arguments. If they don't like it, they cannot be a witness, and should remove themselves from the witness list.
One person cannot talk to many people at the same time, that's true. Each individual can only have a conversation with a handful of people. If you violate this insight, you succumb to the misconception that this truth can be replaced by pressing buttons. It can't.
View more
AHA
NOW WHAT
YOU NEED TO DECIDE
ARE YOU FOR FREE SPEECH
OR ARE YOU CONDEMNING ME FOR IT ?
stupid asshole
View more
Total waste of money.
They drive away good users in their pursuit of policing.
Badly operated.
Bad communication.
Terrible people skills.
Total waste of money.
At $350 per day we could be running marketing campaigns.
Advertising.
Community contests.
All for less than this.
so what are you ideas on how the community does anti-abuse without hivewatchers?
will you do it?
it is just a handful voluntary people - the same since half a decade - who contribute their free time for hive anti-abuse (even countered harmful flags from flag wars @freezepeach) - and got no payment
we also do not like Hivewatchers, but they at least do something, where the big community does not care for itself..
thoughts ?
If it's voluntary why is it costing $350 a day??? Where is the money going.
I have no problem with countering abuse but i've seen HW drive away regular users by targeting them with downvotes for stupid reasons.
No explanation, no warning and no talking to them.
A proper set up would have an account with delegated HP for downvotes.
A specific reporting structure with a list of offences. Standardized so it's clear when and why a person is infringing on the community.
Report an infringement to the team.
First a friendly warning and show them where the problem lies.
If still breaking guidelines a small downvote maybe 10% of the reward.
If persistent offending then increase the downvote but a clear and specific structure on how it would work with open channels of communication.
I have no problem with a person being paid to run a service like this but it needs to be ran as a proper full time service and professionally done not just throwing downvotes around the place and refusing to interact with people in a proper way.
I've been here 7 years myself and have seen a lot over that time. I was targeted by whales back in the early days and almost driven off the platform with downvotes. They should be used sparingly and only for real abuse. Downvotes are harmful and have driven away a lot of users over the past 7 years.
View more
You could literally do nothing and be ahead by $270/day. They deal with less than $20/day of abuse yet they asked for $350/day.
View more
It's not exactly free at $350/day, though, is it?
Since 2017, when I joined the community, more than 1M accounts have joined and began posting and then been flagged off the platform. HW was not useful against the bidbots, but the community itself got rid of them when enabled to do so by tweaking DV code. Rather than fund an institution that can be - and obviously has been - corrupted to profit from attacking that ~1M users and censoring their speech on Hive, the community itself is competent to protect itself when availed the tools, as the demise of bidbots, that threatened to utterly overwhelm the platform at one point, reveals.
HW has become a tool of oppression, of censorship profiteering, and has proven the mechanism of funding is incapable of withstanding corruption and abuse. You cannot call the people of HW 'voluntary' when they're getting $350/day, which would be better spent to oppose censorship than cause it.
It is not factually correct to say the 'big community' does not care for itself. The reduction of the influence of the bidbots has proved the community does care for itself when armed to do so. The problem is that venal profiteers rise to power in a plutocracy, and Hive is a pure plutocracy in which several of the most egregious bidbotters have become entrenched in the oligarchy of top witnesses.
The solution is to fund @freezepeach and allow spam, scams, and plagiarists to be flagged by the community that has demonstrated it's willingness to do so when availed the tools in the code to do so. $350/day would go a long ways to ending opinion flagging that has cost us >1M users already, and created a stench of outrage against that injudicial censorship in the cryptosphere. That can be reversed, and free speech empowered, by coding proper tools for the community to protect itself, and funding @freezepeach to oppose opinion flagging - or Hive is doomed by it's prior (and present) flaggotry, because that reeking stench of censorship will not wash off.
I don't think Hive is doomed, because even the worst stench will wash away when time and the application of cleansing is applied, and people are suffering the censorship across the social mediascape more than ever. HW is the reason people keep trying to use web2 platforms, instead of flocking to Hive to be rewarded for speaking forthrightly. Social media has become the largest financial sector of the IRL markets in the world. Hive has been extremely poorly executed to perform so dismally in a market so obviously profitable and malevolently censored. We have a rhetorical foundation to directly reward creators for their forthright content that clearly has the ability to be extremely financially rewarding if executed properly, but instead has performed worse than the most oppressive Big Social platforms. It has performed worse than them by BEING worse than them for creators, and HW opinion flagging is what is worse.
Fund @freezepeach instead of HW, and allow the community to handle it's business censoring spam, scams, and plagiarism, as it has clearly proved it is capable of doing when it suppressed the bidbots. While there are still at least one bidbot in operation today, it is no longer a threat to the whole community, while HW has shown to be worse, and more insidious threat by crushing forthright speakers and causing them to abandon the platform. HW is so malignant that Fakebook and Twatter are better prospects, and that is a horrible fact of the misapplication of funds and code on Hive today.
View more
HERE HERE
I was going to say hard to say with a deterrence effect, but then seeing 12 HBD being sent to them hourly ( https://peakd.com/@hivewatchers/wallet) from the hive fundation , with very little hive power, and then dumping it into a savings on a dummy account with $77k HBD (https://peakd.com/@nuttin/wallet ) I think it is obviously no at this point.
I think they can be self sustaining without needing to be subsidized further and the training wheels can be taken off. Assuming they own the nuttin account, and the apr is 20%, that's still 42 hbd a day. If they continue to get 290hbd a day and the 42 from interest, then this time next year, it could be 110 hbd a day in interest.
In closing:
1.) Much better case for delegating HP or RC to projects than giving hbd. The foundation gets to keep its resources, and the dev can still use the HP/RC as needed.
2.) I think the 20% apr is ridiculous myself; that it is a ticking time bomb.
That's what I like Hive. Everything is transparent and no one can hide their bad behavior
Except when they do stuff off chain, which bad actors with above room temperature IQ will do.
This is why HW uses Discord to arrange the humiliation ritual people have to endure to get off the blacklist. Bad actors do what bad actors do, and HW does this off chain so you can't see it.
I fail to see how. That barely keeps pace with inflation, IMHO. In fact, I don't think it does. Better minds than mine, to wit Edicted, have thoroughly detailed why 20% interest on HBD savings are not any kind of threat to Hive, and you could have a look at his catalog to see his posts about it.
However, I agree with the statements you make about HW. Frankly, as long as they're opinion flagging I reckon they're Hive's enemy that is preventing the price of Hive from mooning. Without free speech, Hive is without value whatsoever. Whales flagging creators for their opinions reeks worse than skunkwater, and we should be supporting the victims of that censorship as I do with donations that cannot be flagged away so that the censors give up.
I, and I'm sure you also, want Hive to be a better platform for free speech than fakebook or twatter, that egregiously censor. Hive isn't a better platform for free speech or it would eclipse those platforms, and the only reason it isn't is opinion flags like those HW flies on content creators that aren't spammers, scammers, or plagiarists.
Of more concern to me is that the definition of abuse keeps expanding, while with each expansion they claim it was always in the definition and always part of their scope.
The more the definition of abuse is expanded, the more it gets into areas that should be up to broader consensus, not a centrally funded effort. And the more users and communities are alienated.
It is my opinion that the lost market value from decent people leaving Hive and selling out their holdings exceeds the 'saved' value from HW's abuse elimination by orders of magnitude.
The definition is whatever they feel like for the day. They refuse to do anything about the 100 accounts grampo farms with like cleangirl. Also remember they were one of the largest self vote abusers before they got their golden ticket by upvoting 60-90 comments a day for $1-2 each while downvoting people who did the same.
Hive Watchers had been already downvoting "cleangirl" account months before your "buildawhale" account started downvoting it.
The same with this group ("buildawhale started DV-ing a few of them):
alena-deryabina
alexwo
beardmen
cwoong
dasunkwo
estarda
flodareltih
fozzy
francuzzz
goshy
huanan
ien
imaran
immortal8000
iotman
logmen
pixelpenguin
qazaq
sobaken763
wekin
yarrik
Since we noticed that "buildawhale" started downvotuing some of them on day 6, we stopped downvoting those accounts downvoted by "buildawhale".
View more
I think that system is too automated. I see too many cases of a person doing one sketchy thing and then get rewarded with a lifetime of downvotes, even months after having changed their act. I really don't feel that the cost to the DHF is in proportion to the benefits delivered.
I've seen and heard of enough cases where non-abusive behavior or simple mistakes were crushed by HW, especially for new accounts, to vote NO on this poll.
Community will weed out naturally to keep a happy, healthy system.
Bad elements always arrive to scam or try skim profits on the sly.
It is clear that exactly such elements have arisen to take advantage of the funding availed HW, and are harming the Hive community profitably. Wherever governance is undertaken, such malign actors seek to gain whatever power and wealth is expended for their own aggrandizement, not just on Hive, but everywhere and always.
HW needs to go. It is demonstrable that just replacing bad apples will not make the barrel rotten apple proof. As long as there's an apple barrel, rotten apples will lie and cheat to spoil it. I'm confident that backdoor deals are passing funds unseen to advance goals of bad actors, and the visible financial expenditures for HW are but part of the actual sums involved, as graft is a constant hazard of corruptible institutions.
Better for the community and it's rightful forthright expression of it's concerns and exposure of hazards we need to be informed of would be a mechanism to support posts and posters that are wrongfully flagged, IMHO. Profiteers gain no benefit from strengthening the community against such Mammon Hunters, but rather from institutions like HW that attack the community and prey on our number. We should cut them off and stop funding attacks on us, and instead fund armor against their attacks on us that profiteering plutocrats constantly seek to profitably employ to take our wealth for themselves.
When observing actual hives in nature, there are no bees running around destroying the comb and taking the honey. The hive builds the comb, and the honey provides for their entire community. That is the kind of work that should be funded, not destruction of free speech, but protection of it.
Using bots is always destructive, connect to each person it's social media.
View more
Absolutely no. We saw to many times their poor decisions and false alarms making great people leaving Hive for good.
The funding serves no purpose except making those involved receive high stakes for very little contribution and minimal investment.
so we revive a good decentralized anti-abuse system ?
Thank you for your witness vote!
Have a !BEER on me!
To Opt-Out of my witness beer program just comment STOP below
View or trade
BEER.Hey @enforcer48, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @isnochys for you. Enjoy it!We love your support by voting @detlev.witness on HIVE .
Thank you for your witness vote!
Have a !BEER on me!
To Opt-Out of my witness beer program just comment STOP below
View or trade
BEER.Hey @enforcer48, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @isnochys for you. Enjoy it!Learn how to earn FREE BEER each day by staking your
BEER.the only reason im on hive is to stream. but one dude doesnt like my videos so he is flagging them since 1.5 years. im not here for writing stupid things or post one picture from a tree. But im not allowed to do what i want and like. instead one guy uses his power to dictate what i have to do.... it's like communism here
No, that is a total waste. Hivewatchers are the boil of the platform. Instead of punishing their users, take the money and distribute it to really good contributions and ideas that also advance the platform.
Not worth a single cent.
Unfund it
I already "voted" here ...
https://peakd.com/hive-174122/@roleerob/end-of-the-road-for-roleerob
... with my "feet" ... 👋
I say no.
@thedrummerboy
Dann klick doch oben in der Abstimmung noch auf "No". ;)
Keiner hat mit ja gestimmt 🤣🤣🤣
View more
Just feed the pointless SPAMINATOR TROLL & then the Whales are happy earning more HIVE 🤠
Nothing will change, as nobody cares! LOL 🤡
^^
They have no reasons to care, because there are no rewards for objectionable speech. Instead the Hive code creates a plutocracy by curation rewards enabling circle jerks.
Hive could create proper incentives by properly valuing free speech. Social media is the largest financial sector in the world, and it has only arisen in the last decade or so. Clearly Hive could be coded to properly take advantage of this, however, the oligarchy prefers to maintain their fangs buried into our life's blood and their power to rule the little pond.
Either Hive will revise it's code to value free speech above all else, or someone else will.
Thanks!
Would be interesting, what the wittnesses have to say to all this.
Is there a statement anywhere?
Saying anything doesn't work in 'their' favor.
Taking a position might cost 'them' politically.
'They' also think of us as 'them'.
This kind of thinking doesn't help.
There is less butter on 'our' side of the bread.
For now.
'They' should be expected to act as expected, by the one with the most butter.
Crapitalism makes 'us' 'all' whores.
Living under the bridge is not all that attractive when you can sell something as cheap as your soul.
Sell something as cheap as your soul? LoL
View more
According to 'Citizens United', money is speech.
There's your answers.
Thanks!
So Hive is just a mirror of the world outside.
Or even more extreme here: Money/HivePower rules.
View more
Ich steh wohl inzwischen auch schon auf einer dieser #Blacklist der @hivewatchers
What is going on here?
The next user is blacklisted by @hivewachters :
https://peakd.com/hive-121566/@starthilfe/1184-diese-beitraege-brauchen-eure#@hivewatchers/sdd84s
Why are those users mentioned: @solominer @fw206 @newhope?
steht doch da.
View more
They want to control the bad behaviors on Hive. Is there anyone controls the bad behaviors from Hive watchers?
Funny thing, before they got their funding they were abusing more than anyone else self voting 60-90 comments a day for $1-2 while flagging others for doing the same thing for a couple cents.
Is Hive Watcher's doing a good job?
"Total waste of money. They drive away good users in their pursuit of policing.
Badly operated. Bad communication. Terrible people skills. Total waste of money."
I do think that those who are getting proposal funding need to be accountable and justify what they get. There is no breakdown here. Hosting a site and some services will not be that expensive, but if people are working full time on this then they may expect to be paid. The proposal implies that they get something for their time.
I have seen so many complaints about HW, but then most people will not take any action against abuse. I think it would be much worse without HW or something similar. They have to be fair in how they treat people. We will get lots of people desperate to make money who get bad advice on how to do it here. I would rather see them guided to better behaviour than driven away as that leads to them spreading bad vibes. There are cases of organised abuse that can be tricky to track down. If we had a massive influx of users then things could quickly ramp up.
I've been involved in some other anti-abuse, but it can lead to threats and so most people stay anonymous. I have talked to HW people and they are not the power-crazed monsters that some portray them as. I can understand if they get stressed out. I know there are plenty of feuds between various Hivers that get pretty heated.
There is obvious an image problem with HW and we need to find compromises to improve that. The proposal funding needs to go where it does the most good, but that is really determined by the largest accounts. We have to find the right balance so that Hive can actually grow. Driving away new users can harm us all and the whales have the most to lose.
The main reason the proposal was raised like 300% was for a dev to redo their site, which as far as I have seen hasn't been done and it still doesn't even work. Their site is stupid simple too. Doesn't require $350/day, nor does fighting less than $20/day in abuse.
Yeah, the site has not changed in ages and is not great. As I understand it proposals are a binary thing so they either get the requested funding or not. Maybe they should have separate ones for running costs and for new developments.
All too true, and happened literally a million times already.
I have seen some screenshots from their discord that suggest otherwise. Absolutely reprehensible behaviour towards people that seek off the blacklist, and concede they will reform their ways.
Personally, I reckon they should conduct their business on chain, and not on discord. Hive business is not discord's, and discord is a malevolent surveillance device, and HW business should be on chain where everyone can see how they treat folks.
It's not just an image. They opinion flag. It's utterly contrary to the purpose of Hive. They don't need to compromise. They need to quit censoring free speech and stick to their baileywick of censoring spam, scams, and plagiarism. They also should not be profiteering by self voting with funds from Hive. That's just scammy.
There are some nasty people around here, but also a lot who really care about Hive. Some will use their power to attack others. I just think that it's not as black and white as some make out.
Does this also apply to their compatriot service called steemcleaners?
The both of these accounts continue their harassment without any explanation.
I can't speak for them as I don't see what they do.
Having centralized anti-abuse is not all bad, imo.
The question becomes is it profitable, both for the chain to redistribute it and the abusers.
Clearly the abusers are getting what they need, or they wouldn't do it.
So, now the question is how much total abuse is happening.
I got no problem financing some anti-abuse efforts but the the big picture is not being adequately illustrated.
How much abuse is happening outside trending?
Nobody can do anything about that abuse, at this point.
I don't think tying hw's compensation to the amount of redistribution is a good idea, and if the amount of abuse doesn't rise to the costs involved with centralized overhead, then some median would have to be arrived at by 'the community'.
Or, the plutocracy can decree whatever because they hodl the power.
That has 'worked' up to now because 'the community' has failed to reach an organizational power level adequate to change things.
I'd say if you don't like how hw's is doing it, then offer a viable alternative.
Until the community is ready to step up, organize, and replace the good that hw's does, I'd vote for keeping them.
Until 'the community' is ready to step up and stop the trending abuse, this is what we get, continued centralization of power.
best comment
Thank you.
I made another one.
@jarvie @asgarth can we get subscriptions to posts, ie allow notifications of comments by others on posts we opt to follow?
It's too easy to forget to come back two days later to see what other comments have come in, let alone comments that come in much later.
This feature would increase engagement, imo.
View more
The Hive code needs to value free speech above all else, and deprecate mere financial concerns. Most of all, it needs to not be a pure plutocracy, because IRL is proof of how that turns out.
Choose an option below!
Hey Steemcleaners, why are you flagging this comment? You have been flagging this author for YEARS, despite he posts original content DAILY.
You, Steemcleaners, are the problem that has kept Hive from outcompeting Fakebook and Twatter by rewarding content creators such as @por500bolos, because you chase them off the platform.
Knock it off. You're censors. Thought police.
You are the problem Hive needs to solve.
View more
That account is just what HW uses when they don't have a justified reason to downvote anything.
It pays to have idiots delegate and die off somewhere so they get to keep the free stake. But, don't you dare ask for delegations expiring like the way witness votes do.
View more
Whats the alternative? At least they are doing something x)
You and a few other big accounts, are fighting anti-abuse, but not a lot is :/
Doing nothing would actually save us $270/day as they are paid more than 10x the abuse they deal with.
Touché
The alternative is you start using that downvote mana of yours.
It seems that I am doing that daily :)
View more
Thank you for your witness vote!
Have a !BEER on me!
To Opt-Out of my witness beer program just comment STOP below
View or trade
BEER.Hey @enforcer48, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @isnochys for you. Enjoy it!Learn how to earn FREE BEER each day by staking your
BEER.Not sure! But Hive Watchers are doing great to keep HIVE safe and secure from spammers and scammers ;)
USE #BILPCOIN OR #BPC TO EARN BILPCOIN
By @hivewatchers @adm @logic @cwow2 @solominer @steemcleaners and gang join Blurt it has no downvotes
https://www.publish0x.com/the-dark-side-of-hive
https://blurt.blog/burn/@bilpcoinbpc/vdqyh-the-dark-side-of-hive-hivewacthers-and-gang-are-killing-and-burn-time
STOP THE DOWNVOTE ABUSE ON HIVE
Via Tenor
Credit: amigoponc
Earn Crypto for your Memes @ HiveMe.me!
lolztoken.com
ERROR: Joke failed.
@bpcvoter3, You need more $LOLZ to use this command. The minimum requirement is 0.0 LOLZ.
You can get more $LOLZ on HE.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
There isn't enough information to vote on this poll. At face value, it's not worth it. However, how much abuse would the platform suffer if they didn't do their "job"? That is the real question. Can this even be quantified?
An issue that I have with the proposal from @hivewatchers is that it does not break down the costs. How much is spent on its infrastructure, labor, etc? I would like to see specifics.
They stop less than $20 of abuse a day yet get paid $290/day and asked for $350/day. It can be quantified quite well.
I get that. In my opinion, we cannot quantify the amount of "abuse" that would happen on top of what already does. The current cost/benefit is not worth it if your numbers are accurate.
THEY ARE FARMING HIVE
For me it is now the case that not only new posts get a downvote, but also all of my comments that I get votes on. where is that still fair?
I think there is enough room for Hivewatchers to improve their proccess and better explaining to us how and why they do their thing.
I've been always against downvoting, mainly to prevent wars between users. I do agree that hivewatchers uses downvoting as a tool to clean the space, nothing more, nothing less.
I would like to see more info on how they distribute funding.
As I said above, more dialog witth community would enlighten people's view.
This is only my onw personal opinion.
Cheers
4 days ago in #life by tarazkp (84)$0.00
Reply 2
Sort: Trending
[-]bpcvoter2 (-5)(1) 2 days ago · Will be hidden due to low rating
Team marky @gogreenbuddy part of the @markymark @buildawhale @usainvote @apeminingclub @makerhacks @upmyvote @punkteam @rollingbones @theycallmemarky @memess @blockheadgames @leovoter @ipromote gang
STOP THE DOWNVOTE ABUSE STOP SELF VOTING WITH ALL THESE ALT ACCOUNTS