You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Suggestions on how we could improve Steem: Topic:Blacklists, blacklisting
In a system where people must prove their innocence, how is this fair? Where are the funds being collected going?
Steem denied to authors by downvotes get dumped into the reward pool, which gets scooped into the hungry mouths of the TOP EARNERS.
Ironically, steemcleaners is the most consistent TOP EARNER (second only to burnpost).
Isn't it ironic?
There is so much more to bring to light. Really unethical behavior. People have really been deceived. Yet, these same people are very loud when talking about other people. And people never question, never look deeper and never put two and two together.
It's all so gross.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? is a Latin phrase found in the work of the Roman poet Juvenal from his Satires. It is literally translated as "Who will guard the guards themselves?", though it is also known by variant translations, such as "Who watches the watchers?" and "Who will watch the watchmen?".**
Who will watch the watchmen?
Let me know if you think Holacracy mitigates many of these loop-holes.
And this in a nutshell is exactly the problem I witnessed in old steem. No one seemed to be paying attention to what our leaders were really doing. People failed to understand that there could be a difference between what we were told and what was actually happening. And, many things happened which we weren't told about. This is why I want to push for some sort of oath of ethics for witnesses and developers. Such people carry a responsibility to safeguard not only the blockchain (and their interests), they have a responsibility to safeguard the community and its members as well. Transparency, full transparency would allow more oversight. And yes, people could research people's accounts to find out info, but why not just fully disclose what you are doing in the first place? I will respond to the question about Holacracy on your video comment.
Yeah, claiming the blockchain itself "transparent" is an appeal to ignorance (appeal to complexity).
Most people don't have the tools and or the expertise to identify "problematic" behavior patterns purely "from looking at the blockchain".
It places an artificially high-bar for "oversight", especially when critics can simply be "blacklisted".
Yet, this is the mentality: It's all right there. I'm not hiding anything. Anyone can look. It's not my fault if they don't. Then they deserve it.
A sucker is born every minute.
Since it is cumbersome and time consuming and labor intensive to look very few do.
And, I am willing to bet people bank on that.
Well stated.