You are viewing a single comment's thread:
RE: Is Hive Watcher's doing a good job?
My goodness you are lucid! I am so glad I get the benefit of your considerations.
Aside from some expectations of witnesses I don't think are mete, I vehemently agree with most every word you have written here, and didn't know I did until you said it.
"...conjuring up the end of the world (extreme on one side) or drawing a utopia (extreme on the other)..."
Hey! You do read my posts! LOL
"...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."
Gah. This truth sticks in my craw. Nonetheless, it is true, so I'm choking it down. As much as I don't want a 'police', sorting plagiarism and tracking spam takes resources that require dedication mere content consumers aren't providing, and can't. What that means is that HW and Marky are understaffed (and HW is overpaid because of it), and there needs to be - as others have mentioned as well - a formal statement of what is and isn't spam, plagiarism, AI generated content, and so forth, and teams of competent people to serve in the various roles necessary to properly execute policing functions.
I don't know what the procedures have been heretofore, but when scams arise, actual police may legally be required to be informed.
You have substantially changed my perspective on this matter, and I cannot thank you enough for doing so. I hate being wrong, and now that I agree with you I am right again! But, can we have juries of our peers instead of professional committees or judges? I agree we need competent investigation and detection, but there will be matters of judgment, and it seems to me that juries are a strongly justified mechanism for rendering judgment, guilt or innocence, upon presentation of professional investigation and defense by the accused.
Also, once you have institutions, you get corruption. The professional police and investigation committees are going to be infiltrated by scammers seeking to influence investigations, so they can get away with scams. Juries are much more resistant to institutional corruption that judges and police IME.
Thanks!
HaHa! LoL :D - you know that I do.
However you recruit them, this is the weakest point in the matter.
To have non corruptible people, you'd actually would have to refer to the already existing organs outside of hive. But since hive is a globally working sphere, you'd have the executive and judiciary/jury positions according to the location of the involved. But if you have a party from England and one from Venezuela, you have a problem.
In order to meet conflict in a proper way, you need all three: the police to report suspects, a mediator group (arbitrator), and, if mediating does not work, a judge and a jury (while I do not see a jury needed in all cases). You cannot have those people from within the Hive network, since they would be in conflict with their interest. Since they are all stakeholders (getting paid for content creation).
To have outside-people getting involved, you'd actually would need real mediators and real police and real judges since you cannot be any of it, if that is not your education and profession - so people who ARE those pros and do hive as a hobby, for example. Everyone could be a jury member but then you'd have to sit by in a led process, which again, must be led by a professional. And accept HBD for compensation.
Having said all this, I see that almost nobody here is professionally educated in those fields. I am myself a consultant and have a bit experience in mediating, but probably wouldn't want to do it here professionally, since HBD/HP as compensation is not attractive enough.
Maybe, I would do a mediation process once a year for the fun and experience of it. But I would need, before anything, an official mandate from the conflicting parties - and they would have to accept that I probably would have a conflict of interest myself - LoL. There is a certain and strict protocol for mediating a conflict (for very good reasons). If you are interested, I dig in the basement of my steemit blogsite to pull one article out.
View more
I am so glad that you got it!
People think of themselves that they can be anything in one person:
a police officer, an arbitrator, a judge, a juror AND an ethically mature person. That is impossible. In oder being all of them you'd need 20 years of education and still you could't do it in one person, since that is insane.