You are viewing a single comment's thread:
RE: The Stupidity of Hivewatchers
Hw's maintaining the database of abusive accounts, and having somebody managing that daily grind, is something I have not seen a viable alternative to on offer, yet.
Hive-DR has been the alternative built by 'the community', but we lost our dev at the fork and haven't really recovered from that.
We do have many of the small group of folks cut out for this type of work engaging through our discord server.
While some development is ongoing, as always, more funds would speed things up.
Bad curation is the root of this all.
Curators simply refuse to take the time to vet their votes, most are not suited to working in anti-abuse, don't have the talent nor temperament needed to face the fraudulent users' lies day after day.
I don't blame them, I'm not suited to pull the trigger on flags, either.
I think those that do take on this chore, collectively for us all, should be encouraged, but my stake is a drop in the bucket.
Hw's is not the only option, and hasn't been for a very long time.
For example, reallocate all of the common funds to DHF, and individual communities can then make proposals for their own reward funds, which they manage as they see fit.
Ganging up to improve rewards is the solution?
Better, imo, to crab bucket the governance, individually.
Let the second layer worry about tokens and their various distribution models.
The more hands holding hive the better.
You can see how the curators have fed their friends until they are fat enough to feed their's all while they collectively drove the majority of 2.4 million people away.
Plenty of accounts, lauded as 'par excellence' by the most powerful curators on the platform, with high reps and sub 2mv wallets, while those that do powerup and intend to stay are pushed off the rewards tail entirely by bad curation at the top.
20 accounts take 50+ percent of the pool, day after day, for years now.
Some accounts would be richer than god if the coin mooned.
Instead of the redshills and the bildaboogers running the planet it would be hive whales.
That isn't likely to happen, iyam.
Until it takes 1000 accounts to earn the first 50% of rewards, the coin is not nearly decentralized enough for me.
The database of abusive accounts has largely been corrupted into near worthlessness by @logic's poor logic regarding abuse. I see automated @spaminator downvotes on posts from some of my favorite (non-abusing) users.
View more
Curation rewards exchange pecuniary interest for those more valuable. Curating posts on the basis of how much financial reward they will create cannot but produce bad curation.
It is the elevation of financial value above far more valuable things to society that underlies this problem. AI is not the problem Hive faces. Were other values than money primary, no one would try to pass off AI content as their own work, for the reasons I stated earlier.
The ability to catch people posting AI content as their own will decrease precipitously, until it does not exist. Therefore the solution does not lie in that direction. Since the problems of spam, plagiarism, and scams also derive from the same principle, @hivewatchers has never been more than a kludge that reduced the symptoms of the actual problem through means that actually perpetuate the real problem, which is substituting money for more valuable rewards.
That is the underlying problem.
View more
I don't view the idea I described as ganging up, I view it as decentralizing the reward pool to the community level. Communities that are doing a good job* can pitch to Hive stakeholders to be subsidized to have a larger pool to administer among their members. Those who don't want to do that can still operate entirely as they like with second layer tokens alone.
* Good job meaning things such as active and growing user base, attracting attention and acclaim from outside Hive, not being overrun with spam and abuse, positive SEO stats, energizing real world Hive-related or Hive-sponsored activities and events, etc. This will all be compelling to get subsidized by Hive stakeholders and when aggregated to the community level are more feasible to scrutinize and be reasonably resistant to abuse.
View more