You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Non-GumpyCompliant vote sellers are now to be used exclusively to profit from the reward pool!
I feel that his intent may be in the right place as well but think that his efforts would be better directed at Steemit Inc and the Witnesses by encouraging a change to the in-built functionality of the platform itself. It should be able to self-police all users via an equitable rule set that applies to everyone, irrespective of status, SP amount, etc. That would be the ideal change on a holistic level.
People are self-policing right now, what sort of change are you proposing?
Self-policing is problematic because it's unwritten law. Newbies can get penalized for doing things that they don't necessarily know are wrong, and that seem to be legitimate and OK.
It's ridiculous to expect every new user to learn an unwritten set of rules that are enforced by various community whales and their bots.
While most automated down-voting is targeting larger accounts and is done with good intention, the better approach would be to set up community guidelines for what actions are and are not appropriate, and modify the code where possible to prevent inappropriate actions from taking place to begin with.
Yeah, a lot of stuff on this platform is not self-explanatory, so newbies can come in without knowing how stuff works and get burned. It can be a bit uninviting.
Be a normal human and don't try to shill bid your post and @grumpycat would go to sleep. He is only awake because a group of youtube shills have appeared on steemit producing shit content and gaming the reward pool. This is how the community reacts to shills.
I don't think you know what the word shill means.
Yup, I am sure you are the smarter of the two of us. That's why I understand and you don't get it.
As @weaselhouse noted in his response, self-policing is counter productive as it imposes a set of rules onto Steemit which the platform itself does not uphold or expect users to abide by.
For example, many users complain about self voting abuse but it's permitted by the platform. So until Steemit stops allowing it, then complaining about it is inconsequential. The founders themselves acknowledged its propensity as a feature to be abused in the Steem White Paper, where it's said: "...each individual voter has incentive to vote for themselves at the expense of the larger community goal." And here we are today, two years later and self voting is still an issue.
In reference to @grumpycat's initiative, it appears to be predicated upon a desire to root out users that engage in reward pool abuse, with an emphasis on targeting those users and voting services that seek/offer upvotes 3.5 days after a post is published. The problem with this is that Steemit itself allows upvotes on posts up to day 7. And there are some voting services that are manually operated and thus have backlogs - a user may pay for a vote on day 2 but not receive it until day 4 or 5, for example.
As the saying goes, "Don't hate the player, hate the game." There are no doubt users that play the game here, but they are doing so within the rules of the platform. So for wide reaching and constructive changes to be implemented, compliance initiatives such as what Grumpy Cat is engaging in are better enforced by being coded into future iterations of Steemit itself. In this manner, the updated rules of the game apply to all users equitably. And that requires buy in from Steemit Inc and the Witnesses. That is who Grumpy Cat and others should be engaging for reform.
I feel like witnesses are reluctant to speak their mind because steemit inc has such a huge stake that it would take just one click to vote any of them out . It's an intimidation game, even if not directly perceived as such.
I can't think of any other reason for witnesses to be so passive on these issues.
If there was ever a time for Witnesses to speak up, it's now.
Steem has broken out above its previous all time highs and momentum is bullish to kick off 2018. However, for that to be sustained, constructive improvements to this platform will have to be implemented. It is after all the prevailing proof of concept for the steem blockchain, though that may soon change with the introduction of smart media tokens.
I assume that is Grumpy Cat's intention, among others pursuing similar initiatives. Ultimately though, the reform has to come from the top and not from self policing efforts led by different whales with varying points of view on what users should and should not do. Their intent may be sound, but the execution isn't in the long run.
Hopefully SMTs and Communities will break up the ability for large stakeholders to create such drama.