The purpose of this article is to present a policy draft to the Hive community. The Verify Your Brain tribe wishes to communicate developing policies on abuse mitigation and reporting. The VYB Moderation policy presented today is a draft of the Anti-Abuse Team guidance we expect to follow for the foreseeable future. The article will be a living document and adjusted based on community input and lessons learned. We desire community engagement to ensure that this policy fulfills both the admin team and community needs to sustain and expand the platform.
We would like your input, opinions, and advise. What works? What doesn't? How can we improve? I only ask that you be professional in your commentary.
We invest in one thing to enhance something else. Athletes invest time and energy to reach ever-greater heights of physical prowess. Students can also spend their time and energy to raise their intellectual aptitudes. The paths may be different, but the end goal is always the same: End up better than where you started.
The Hive blockchain provides an investment opportunity for people with one or many goals to achieve something more significant. For Hive to operate successfully, however, it requires certain behaviors from the community. There are rules we need to follow to protect what we have.
The Verify Your Brain tribe (VYB) provides a subjective-DV free tribe that, like Proof of Brain, caters to the needs of every content creator. Do you want to write about finances, art, music, STEM, or fiction? No problem! In this layer-2 tribe, you can't just remove rewards based upon opinion. However, like any investment, it still requires protection.
The typical means of moderating the blogosphere don't all apply to VYB. Using a DV merely marks the article. There is no financial impact at this time. VYB, instead, will utilize the tribal mute function to moderate its platform.
All layer-2 tribes possess the ability to mute an article or author. The tribe using the mute function only affects that tribe. Enabling the tribe-specific mute function enacts the following actions:
There is a stigma associated with the downvote and its relationship to censorship. Rest assured that the use of the mute function IS censorship. So, what do we do with this knowledge? How can we protect the community against fraud and improper use of the mute function?
It is with these questions I recall @themarkymark's article on risks with Hive-Engine tribes. While he spoke at length about tribe financial risks, I was focused upon how a tribe might employ moderation.
Moderation protects the community from abusive behaviors related to both upvotes and downvotes.
Many scenarios exist that point towards abusive behaviors. We could probably write several volumes about the topic. The point of this article isn't to discuss them all but instead to present how we plan to manage moderation within the Verify Your Brain tribe.
Moderating tribe activities requires a team of individuals dedicated to monitoring abusive practices within the tribe. Ideally, we would like to have a group of 5 individuals working at various times to monitor VYB activities and mitigate any abusive behaviors.
If anyone is interested in fulfilling such a role in the community, please don't hesitate to contact @scholaris.
Moderators would:
Application of the mute function occurs with justification and confirmation. In essence, we would utilize the mute feature similarly to how I currently issue downvotes within the Proof of Brain tribe:
We cannot predict every scenario possible regarding abuse on the Hive platform. A MUTE might not be issued in some cases if the author responds promptly and corrects the issue.
In other cases, a mute may be applied immediately for abusive actions reported by layer-1 regulators.
Based upon interactions with the Hive and Proof of Brain communities, regular communications on moderator activities within the VYB tribe appears necessary. To maintain awareness within the tribe, the following communication activities, at a minimum, should occur:
Period | Topic | Action |
---|---|---|
1 Week | Mute Applied | Newly applied MUTE actions |
1 Month | Mutes Applied | Currently applied MUTE actions |
1 Month | Appeal Made | Status of Appeal |
Appeals are available to the content creator to appeal a decision of a MUTE action. Content creators wishing to appeal may do so as follows:
I want content creators to have this opportunity in most cases. I think this is important to address. If you have any comments on this area, please let me know.
Community engagement within any community isn't merely desired, it is required to sustain the environment and facilitate its expansion. The success of both the Proof of Brain and Verify Your Brain tribes depends upon honest and open conversations within the community.
Please do not hesitate to comment on your position concerning these proposed guidelines. Only with your engagement in this community can we improve our policies.
Like curation, the moderation of tribe activities seeks to level the playing field. The Verify Your Brain tribe, like POB, aims to ensure people receive as fair treatment as possible during their activities. The moderation policy presented in this article represents the tribe's commitment to protecting the platform, its content creators, and investors.
Thanks to the community for reading along with this article. I look forward to providing more in the future. Thank you for reading and following throughout my Hive journey.
Thanks also to @trostparadox and @calumam for the opportunity to assist in developing this new tribe. I am grateful for the opportunity.
Beyong the whole sheet of excel data, i would volunteer to moderate, about 50 post daily, i would hunt for plagarism and use several anti plagarism tools, I already moderate on hive motors, and is a community where people post like 10 post weekly, so i rarely take more than a hour to check on it, per week... Basically im free and i can help a bit :)
The tracking stuff would be on my end. Your end would be to evaluate if it is helpful to you. Once I figure out all this Hive Engine data mining stuff I'd keep things up to date.
Are you on the POB or VYB discord?
Im on neither, sorry i took my time on answering, took a day yesterday due a broken tooth, im solving to remove it on saturday morning, hopefully.
Can you add me to both? I would like to help the vyb proyect, i think is a great idea and it step up to fix the few mistakes pob had, all the data i have gathered on vyb is inmensibly positive, and i would love to help because of it.
If you pass me a model of how the excel sheet works then i would do so gladly.
View more
Doesn't blurt fix all these issues, but in a much simpler way? (more free market, less oversight - beurocracy?)
It will be intersting to see it play out ...you can already see the toxic players lining up.
Yeah. I feel Blurt's platform already addresses the problems we've seen. We're just testing the theories here in a different way.
That's cool - I'm have a more of a 'keep it simple, stupid' approach to eveythingin life.
Complexities tend to create more complexities.(unintended consequences, chaos theory, etc) KISS avoids all that.
I've also noticed the most robust systems, are the simplest ones. (that's why socialist/technocrats hate simplicity - they have nowhere to hide their subterfuge and machinations).
Is this new platform capable of splitting away from hive (another, separate, block chain?).
The reason I ask is that for me, at this point - I have zero desire to enrich the toxic pin brain authoritarians that hold the power in hive.
...If the Vybrainium was successful on this platform - that's what it would be doing.
These people need to be deprived of power, not given more ($$$).
View more
I'm glad you are working on this!
Constant down voting of posts and comments to control content, rewards, and reputations, is gradually destroying the Hive platform and has been for over five years.
And circle jerk upvoting is the entire foundation of business as usual - a community without both of those abuses would be a whole different world.
@frot
Circle voting is an enigma. It seems like everyone does it, yes? You vote on the content written by people you trust. In turn, they vote on your material. It's always been interesting to observe. It's when content quality drops significantly in the process that the community seems to take action. What's important about this draft is to make sure any action is transparent and communicated.
Very good @scholaris. I'm happy to see this entire organization taking root in this new phase of POB and VYB. Without a doubt, you are the right person to be spearheading this moderation and surveillance plan, even if it is a strenuous job.
I have learned a lot here about the importance of being careful about voting values, about content and what is voted and not voted on in the community. I never had any problems in these DV or Mute wars and I hope to stay that way. But I know these protocols are important to avoid further confusion later. I think VYB came to make us grow a lot here.
Thank you for your kind words. I feel VYB is just a natural evolution and compliment for POB.
Thoughtfully answer the question below within 12 hours to earn 5 VYB (liquid).
QUESTION:
"If you could completely remove one form of abuse on the platform, what would it be and why?"
VYBolt Lightning Chain Help
You can tag one friend to keep this lightning chain active.
If you tag somebody who has already commented, the lightning chain will receive one strike.
Three strikes = VYBolt chain break, @vybolt will reset, new question, new commenter
Repeat commenters can respond if the chain has not been broken by three strikes.
Any replies made to this comment which aren't from the tagged author (shared at the very beginning of this comment) are voided when it comes to VYB rewards, and won't contribute to the VYBolt Lightning chain milestone.
This VYBolt comment is the first in the chain and contains the basic mechanics. Replies from @vybolt will be condensed to reduce resources.
Management of @vybolt is fully manual at this time. Thank you for your patience.
Well, my answer would probably be the same as your thinking minds behind VYB. Eliminate the Down Vote so we don't have unnecessary power wars here. I think that once this is resolved, it's much easier to create a harmony, although sometimes it's not very easy to please the whales' ego, haha!
@hranhuk come take lightning with us and earn some VYBs
View more
I know I don't have time to moderate or I'd volunteer. I'm glad everything seems to be spelled out. It's good to plan like you're enemies before coming together as friends in the community.
You and your team has done a really great job and this post is self explanatory and clear.
I'm excitely looking forward to new dawn.
First, I want to commend you @scholaris and your team members for this well-thought-out tribe.
ON The Downvote and aspect,
If there can be an option to protest downvote, it will go a long way to help fight off downvote abuse. it should come in such a way that if a writer appeals against a downvote and the appeal was reviewed, and it came out that he was downvoted wrongly, he should be compensated while the person who downvoted him wrongly will be punished, perhaps muted for a week or so. ( if the person happens to be a newbie, the community should consider it as an error and then warn him) if the reverse happens to be the case, the writer is further punished for the extra effort the moderator made in investigating his complaint.
On Engagement Aspect.
Can it be possible that users of this new tribe will be given a minimum monthly expected number of Comments? This can increase engagement.
can there be a word prompt that once used on a post by other writers will notify moderators about a particular post.
There won't be down vote on the Verify Your Brain new tribe.
That's a slippery slope, my friend. I will start this particular discussion first by asking you a question:
Lol. I take this back.
View more
I like the vyb format and will start using the Tribe.
My idea evolves around a more decentralized model. What about if we have flags with choices like tags if we see a post that goes against the community standards?
Example, one user sees an article that's obviously plagiarized(in their opinion). They should check it first through a plagiarism checker like smalltoolsseo. They hit the flag button and choose plagiarism. Then a text box shows up where they can add the url of the original content.
After a certain amount of flags the plagiarism tag is added to the post(or say a red checkmark showing the post in question is under review by their peers), alerting others to do their own research. There can be an option of yes or no after the initial flag if they agree or not.
After a certain threshold is reached for or against the accusation, the post is either muted or the tag is removed and it gets a green checkmark added showing it was thoroughly vetted and can no longer be flagged.
You've given some good development suggestions. I like the idea of users selecting a flag to identify suspicious articles, as well as, performing their own research. We can definitely try to drive and encourage such behavior. Actually, I really like this idea.
Your idea about a decentralized model is very similar to my own. I don't like the centralized concept of moderation over the long run. It will bind me, or anyone else, indefinitely. Ideally, I envision, like you, a community that moderates itself.
Plagiarism tools aren't where I need them to be currently. They are great for scanning larger volumes of information. They are not great for verification of plagiarism. While I was moderating on POB this morning, smallseotools, kept flagging articles at 100% plagiarism. The problem was that it was pointing back to the same article written by the author. For example:
There's a lot of examples like that around. I'll use the tools, but I can't rely on them solely. So, I'll always check manually too.
Right, which is why we need to follow the links it provides. Users simply need to know what to look at how to verify it using the tools available. So posts reminding users their roll and how to maintain that role will be important.
Curated for #informationwar (by @aagabriel)
Delegate to the @informationwar! project and get rewarded
!PIZZA !ALIVE
@scholaris! You Are Alive so I just staked 0.1 $ALIVE to your account on behalf of @samsmith1971. (4/10)
The tip has been paid for by the We Are Alive Tribe through the earnings on @alive.chat, feel free to swing by our daily chat any time you want.
PIZZA Holders sent $PIZZA tips in this post's comments:
@samsmith1971(4/16) tipped @scholaris (x1)
Please vote for pizza.witness!
Congratulations @scholaris! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s):
Your next target is to reach 52000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP
Check out the last post from @hivebuzz:
A nice long well written article that doesn't really say alot. You could have kept it alot shorter just sticking with "add the ability to censor content". I don't know, if you know, that when you consolidate power, corruption manifests that area. Your heart is in the right place, but I don't think you realize that this just creates another tool to be abused...
Sticking to "add the ability to censor content" is horrible advice. Also, ALL tools can be abused. We have these guidelines propose to prevent the abuse inherent in muting someone.
The point of the policy isn't only to censor content that goes against community guidelines. The point it to be transparent about it, report the actions to the community, and allow them to reverse the decision.
We communicate the reason for muting an article and author so the community can play a role in determining if such an action is warranted. In this manner, we allow the accused author and community to play a role in managing the tribe.