You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! Let's all step back and figure out what can be done to stop LOSING STEEM USERS
I personally think it is a really ridiculous reason to downvote, but I happen to think several of our whales are completely random and have difficulty controlling their feelings.
Keep in mind these are highly intelligent but likely socially challenged people.
In any case we do have to accept unreasonable upvote and downvotes.
Very true. Very true.
Once again thank you for sharing your view with us.
Piotr
Dear @crypto.piotr, thanks for your great work.
It is not easy to find people with a firm opinion and position in the face of behaviors such as these, in addition to having the courage to denounce and expose them without fear of being disqualified and attacked by whales who want to forcefully impose their point of view.
I have read comments that say that the reasons behind the negative votes is the health of the ecosystem and the good functioning of the palataforma. Honestly, this discussion demonstrates everything that is contrary and what it says is that there are people with unconsiderable voting power who abuse that great power, and vote with vague and meaningless criteria publications that simply do not fit their way of thinking or their particular taste . If you don't like something, keep going.
A discussion like this and an attitude of "gunman" not only frightens and increases new users, but also the older ones who find it difficult to attract traffic to their publications.
Great gesture friend, congratulations.
Thank you for your supportive comment @fucho80
And enjoy your weekend ahead :) Yours, Piotr
Dear Piotr, lets cut the bullshit and now,
you are nothing but a spammer and a scammer,
a spammer due to your transfer memos, and a scammer due to you being in charge of "project hope", a project that is nothing but a circlejerk run by 5 venezuelans, and to which you shamelessly claim a "100 %ROI".
I suggest you cut the bullshit and the whining, and start working for the real improvement of the platform.
Regards,
Jaguar Force
Look Jaguar.
You have no idea how project.hope works.
You think you are an expert and you are actually a rude vulgar.
You always make empty accusations without finding out thoroughly.
I have seen you accuse plagiarism of plastic artists without being true. You do some supposed "investigations" to accuse someone and look good before "GOD." I don't envy your work.
I beg you to stay away from us. In Steemit there are quite a few cases of improper behavior with which you can get distracted.
Jaguar.force itself is a true "circlejerk". The guilty parties are you. We use our true personal accounts to work. We do not hide in other accounts as "Crow" (Cuervo).
Piotr is not a scammer. Find someone who has felt cheated by him. Go, find someone who accuses him of scam and then you and I will talk.
Everybody that is anyone in this platform knows the quality and accuracy of our work.
So frankly speaking, I coulnd't give a fuck less about what you think.
Have a great day.
Just drop it @juanmolina. It's pointless.
You've got DRAMA. You are going to be a Whale!
To view or trade
DRAMAgo to steem-engine.com.Dear @jaguar.force, @juanmolina
I'm sorry to hear that you consider our efforts nothing but "circle-jerking". You surely have a right to have your own opinion - I still believe that what we're doing is good for STEEM and I enjoy seeing our community around @project.hope to grow slowly.
So again, I respect your opinion - however I would like to point of that my current publication is about something else: potential downvote abouse.
Could you please let me know, if you really do not see my points valid? That being downvoted for 'not downvoting others' isn't mindset worth supporting?
Yours, Piotr
@jaguar.force I would like Steem to become more successful and gain wider adoption.
For that to occur people need to be able to accumulate and distribute Steem.
The oligarchy here which promotes flags as a virtue, is literally driving users and potential users away.
This comment of yours, it leads me to suspect that you are part of that oligarchy which is actively working against the success of the platform and Steem.
I doubt that anyone could be so divorced from reality that they actually believe that this pathetic behavior helping to attract users lol
you accusations against @crypto.piotr are so pathetic they could have come from @berniesanders or @themarkymark
@whatsup, I agree here with the first two sentences. I don't agree with the last because you don't give a gun to a kid who has never used one and tell him to go play nicely with his friends. You definitely shouldn't give it to a person who has ill-intent. Where is the vetting process? Not everyone needs the power to DV.
My opinion.
Well that's a funny opinion. Who is going to Vett? Based on What criteria?
How is the open and decentralized?
I do understand that this is a libertarian platform and most people here don't believe there is a government here on the platform because it is "open and decentralized."
Who is going to vett is a good question. How can that be developed is another good question. Neither one do I have an answer for at this time.
Based on what criteria? That would also have to be developed. I'm sure some of you that have been around would have some opinions on it. Maybe the criteria is as rigorous as becoming a doctor; maybe something a little less intensive. Right now, as it is, if a person has money, they have the power to control (government) what happens on this platform. Money should not be the deciding criteria because the some of those people with the money have ill-intention or just simply have a strong opinion about something.
I say leave the DV that doesn't take away any money but don't give everyone the power to take (steal) other people's money.
It's a DPOS (Delegated Proof of Stake) platform, that means... Literally... those who are invested make the decisions.
Sort of like a business owner. Those who do not have stake invested do not.
The entire blockchain runs on that... The entire distribution runs on that.
It doesn't mean they are right or they are doing the right things, but what it does say is they have the RIGHT. And every user can decide if they like the system or not and participate or not.
It has flaws, big flaws, but if you don't understand the blockchain part... The distribution and management it sounds like you joined a platform that you didn't understand.
Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it less true.
While your ideas are great, they do not match the Steem Blockchain. Maybe a bunch of you should get together and make a competitor programmed around some different criteria.
Again, it comes down to who has the most money and that shouldn't be the one deciding factor. What about time invested in the platform? What makes this not count?
But, my opinion doesn't matter here because I'm a homeless dude without much money and, therefore, shouldn't be allowed to have an opinion. Many of the content creators here, while they may not be homeless, don't have much money either; but we do bring something to the platform: our under-valued content that gets us little return on our time invested. But, hey, we're poor. So who gives a fuck. As you said...
This is my current opinion on how this platform is run.
I'm still here though, chipping away.
I'm glad you are here... and you can hold opinions, but the opinions you hold are on a Delegated Proof of Stake Blockchain.
Which means... All decisions are based on stake. All distribution is based on stake. It's just a fact no matter what people's circumstances are.
Thanks, mate. Glad to hear.
I do have a stake in the platform, but it isn't enough money for people to turn heads. And this is one of the reoccurring problems I've seen since my time being on this platform. It has come across it too many times. Something about it just isn't working.
I agree it is very flawed. But I guess I think it helps to understand why it works the way it works.
maybe not.
Late thank you for dropping by @tristancarax and your comment.
Somehow I didn't notice your comment until just now.
Cheers, Piotr
What an excellent and mature comment @tristancarax
🙏🏼
Thanks for dropping by and your supportive comment @tristancarax
It's hard not to agree with you,
Piotr
''In any case we do have to accept unreasonable upvote and downvotes.''
I have two questions.
What is an unreasonable upvote?
And why should anyone accept flags for anything other than plagiarism?
To accept such behavior is clearly the death of Steemit, it needs more users.
if the aim is to de-fang Steem and make it irrelevant everything makes sense.
Perhaps some do want to make the blogging side irrelevant.
Many believe that endusers do not add value, so in their mind, any upvote is unreasonable, so feel self upvoting is unreasonable. All sorts of people have different views.
Now what?
I dont see that they want to make the blogging side irrelevant. If anything the focus on quality posts is harming the platform. Allow the focus to be on the connections made not this pathetic curation farming
They want to make the human connection irrelevant which is possibly the number one component.
''Now what?''
Get clear about how flags are used: Farming and plagiarism and abusers who flag outside those perimeters such as @berniesanders / @themarkymark and the rest of the irredeemable's
Its just not that complicated
And how will I enforce this on Bernie and Marky?