A call to separation of powers in Steemit
In what have been a tough couple of weeks for me on Steemit, I have been the victim of a subjective and abusive flagging campaign by one of the Steemit founders which have intensified after I spoke out about it in a try to draw the attention of the community, in what seems to be a punitive response to the voicing of my feeling of injustice.
Despite the large support of the community and condemning of such behavior, no one was able to change this injustice.
The reason no one was able to do anything about it is the absolute power granted to the person subjectively flagging my posts.
Power tends to corrupt absolute power corrupts absolutely (Lord Acton)
I found myself unable to have recourse to any other authority to lift this injustice, because my accuser is the judge and executioner, and only a brave few dared to speak against this injustice, and their voice was totally ignored regardless of the fact that many of them are very respectable members of this community.
Having the legislative, judicial and executive powers in the hand of the same authority is the main characteristic of totalitarian regimes which have proven their failure. Because absolute power corrupts absolutely!
Some of the results of the absolute power being in the hands of Steemit inc founders and high level staff that we have observed so far is the pushing of subjectively selected authors and witnesses, in addition to the subjective suppression of others.
Separation of powers
Separation of powers is a key foundation of modern societies as it enforces equality and equity and provides a healthy environment for development. I hereby call for a separation of powers in Steemit, I think anyone in office at Steemit inc or related to it should not be allowed to vote on content or witnesses. Steemit inc is the legislative authority, it sets laws through the blockchain which apply to everyone seamlessly.
The judicial authority will be exercised by the voters, and the executive one by the moderators which should be the only ones able to flag posts based on a defined and clear set of criteria.
I think this is a tough and important decision that must be made in order to reduce the subjectivity that’s taking place currently, it will also be a lot more encouraging to authors and investors to have such separation of powers in place.
Separation of powers is a necessary and required change to take the Steemit platform to the next organizational level and help it take its deserved place among the biggest social platforms.
To tell the truth although I haven't seen any repercussions directly I'm somewhat hesitant to speak out against the "predictions" of a whale like The Dollar Vigilante for fear that his pals including @ned and @dantheman might put the hammer to me. To their credit everything's been cool.
But keep in mind another clear sign of totalitarianism is the chilling effect. How many are afraid to voice an opinion or enter into debate when the outcome could turn into irreparable damage to one's reputation?
It's interesting that it's that very same mechanism which has kept trolling on this platform to a bare minimum. Compare the repartee on most posts here to comments on a YouTube video. Night and Day.
So I'm in complete agreement with @masteryoda that there needs to be a division of power to help balance the needs of those who would like to challenge an authority figure versus letting every jerk out there tear down people for no reason. Edit: to clarify I'm calling comment trolls jerks. Not anybody in particular.
The separation of powers could dovetail nicely with a suggestion made by @thecryptofiend a number of days ago. After all if Ned and Dan stop voting that's a lot of Steempower left dormant. The proposal is to lend the voting power of some of the largest Steemit accounts to a rotating elected group of curators who could take the time to spread the upvotes while benefiting from the curation rewards.
Thank you for making a stand Master Yoda. I believe you're making a difference just by standing up and being heard.
Unfortunately, when we get to the point where people are afraid to speak their minds in fear of retaliation that’s a very bad sign.
The general sentiment is very important in social platforms, if it is oppression then chances of success are nonexistent.
I made this post in a positive attempt to make the debate public, which can only be a good thing.
Thank you for your courageous and incisive comment.
when i started to censor myself, this began to seem like just another crappy job where i was waiting for the boss to call me into the office and fire me. if i'm going to have a crappy job like that, i can make way more money somewhere else. i'll have fewer intelligent friends to talk to but, at least i won't have to watch some of the best subjected to the tantrums of unthinking, ignorant brutes.
i have been expecting to be crushed by some easily offended child for a while now. i don't know if i'll stick around to feel the relief of the man who, expecting it for months, was finally hauled off to gulag to be with his neighbors.
who wants to live with the threat of some indolent miscreant coming to take away everything that you've worked for, and even the community has indicated that you are worth.
what are these people contributing but turmoil? their posts are worthless and would be seen to be so were it not for the armies of sycophants lapping up the toxic pablum they excrete that they label as gold.
we should be at least able to vote on their downvotes. if enough of the community votes against their power they should be stripped of it. i am not saying they should be crushed into oblivion as they do to others but, that they that abuse their power should have it taken away.
Wow, these are some very powerful words.
Thank you very much, I'm glad to have the support of such wonderful people here.
i'll do my best until i am crushed.
I think any larger undertaking needs a division of labor and a division of power, the suggestion that people can apply to be elected and be voted on and then after three months would have more public confidence.
Obviously the platform needs a strategic focus as well as in policy decisions and direction so the executive branch should have the right to publicly veto any proposals but to do this publicly with open transparency . . .
At least then we can see that more than a few personalities are involved : )
just my two cents worth ; )
Bravo! 👏👏👏👏👏
Has trolling been used as a thin veneer to cover up the convoluted logic, totalitarian feel & missing details of Steemit?? (by people like @ned and @dantheman )
I think credit where it's due. Trolling and spamming seem to come naturally to all parts of the internet. Successfully controlling those issues is no small feat. I rather think the totalitarian bent is a byproduct of policing those annoyances. Improvements in governance could maintain a check on bad actors while limiting the power of individuals in the ruling class.
Even a small change to how flagging works might be key. We already have voting percentages.
So why not limit the flagging power based on the number of flaggers? Perhaps 10% base with +10% available to each subsequent flagger. Therefore consensus flagging would do the most damage while a single outlier can't ruin somebody.
I think this whole anyone can flag model is wrong, it would be better to use a report to moderators feature. After which a group of trusted moderators (witness like selection?) can vote to flag or not (as @ reddust mentioned in his comment). If a post is flagged by moderators, the reward should go to 0 directly with some impact on reputation as well. There is no such thing in my mind as partially flaggable content.
@dgiors I cannot reply to your comment directly because of the nesting limitations so I hope you’ll see my reply here. First I think flagging and downvoting should be two separate things. Flagging is for abusive content, downvoting is an expression of one’s opinion.
Flagging should have clear rules, and should not be subjective.
The main point I’m trying to make in this post, is that allowing Steemit inc related individuals to vote on content and witnesses is a clear conflict of interest.
Agreed except for the part about no such thing as partially flaggable.
We either need a downvote as an alternative to flagging or continue to use flagging in that capacity when it fits.
I'm thinking user downvote (or flag) should be nerfed quite a bit so that it's still the moderator's prerogative to literally take down a post.
I suppose if there were no user flagging the comments section would still provide a place for a dissenting view or feedback. The thing is if I see posts here offering unsafe medical advice or the like I want to not only speak out against it but cast a vote of no confidence.
Edit continued: But to a moderator two users with differing opinions about what's acceptable medical practice could only become viewed as biased whichever side they come down upon.
Can anybody be considered the oracle of all things true? Certainly no moderator should assume such a role.
So while upvote is a powerful tool for demarcating the wisdom of the crowd the ability to downvote should also come as an important tool for judging the social consensus.
I like your last 2 sentences. AGREED. Evolution not revolution - though that would be nice too :)
Bots would run wild I think with that one, wouldn't they?
I get your point. 9 puny bots could pave the way for a huge 100% vote. Then there must be another way.
Powerful words @mindhunter but sadly true.
I'm reminded of yankees who move to the south then complain that "we did it differently back where I came from".
And so children, the lesson we can learn from today's post is why, in practice, anarcho capitalism inevitably replaces the tyranny of the state with the far greater tyranny of corporate rule. Good luck with that separation of powers thing but you might be mistaking this site for a democracy. My advice is not to give a flying fuck about your reputation and just speak your mind. Oh, the tyranny of the high school cafeteria!
As I was reading the comments here a thought came to me. That the better the trust and culture within the community, the less of these difficult cases there will be, and the easier they will be to solve. It seems unrealistic to totally "law" away these problems ( or organize them away ) if there is not a strong culture of "we are all in this together" which ties us together in the first place. Imagine if these kind of disputes could be consistently solved with open dialogue and deep conversation where the parties really listen and try to understand one anothers point of view. Then all the inevitable conflicts could be a source to make the community stronger. When developing a system like Steemit bumps along the road are inevitable. All of this is very untested territory and of course we have to expect problems. If we see the problems as a learning possibility for the community then it can still all be worth it.
With that said maybe an added feature could be a kind of "open tribunal" if specific cases of conflict emerge. Especially if they are conflicts that highlight systemic dilemmas. In these cases the involved parties could have time and space to present their side of the case in great detail and clarity. Everyone can be encouraged to say openly whatever they think as long as it is done in a friendly and civilized dignified way. I mean : if we are going to create something amazing with Steemit unlike anything seen before...why set anything less than the highest standard from the getgo? :)
None of us are perfect. We often misunderstand one another or have prejudices. So we cant expect any complex social system to work perfectly either. In any case Steemit is an incredible social experiment and a learning experience. When people think differently this can lead to a lot of trouble and it can also lead to new insights. I really have a hope that this place will develop a culture where people actually speak openly and listen to each other. A place where practically all conversations proceed in a friendly, open and respectful manner. This would be so amazingly supercool to see.
Actually I am convinced that everything rests on this. If we let the common standard of communication deteriorate Steemit will be a failure no matter what.
But what if we set the standard of communication sky high? What if we make it a top priority? What if we even make a science and an artform out of continually improving it?
I dont know why but I have this dream that Steemit will be the first internet community to actually do that. Take digital communication as an artform to totally new levels. If we could really do that. I think Steemit will explode into awesomeness. It would make us unstoppable.
Excellent words of communications there @mindwheeeeeeel - you know for such a centralized system of Steemit SP power I've never seen such lack of leadership or communication.
I've seen better decentralized cryptos with better leadership and much better communication - the pervasive threat of raised voices here getting cut down just shows you we are not truly decentralized yet - until the pre-mined SP power is split amongst all.
Then as you say, Steemit would then explode into awesomeness and become invincible :-)
And it is still very early days! We have to expect it will take time for a system like this to find its pace. If we can learn from the experiences along the way we can figure out a good way to do it. Its just that there will inevitably be bugs along the road. Lots of them. Of course there will be. There will be misunderstandings. People will say stupid things or draw wrong conclusions based on incomplete information. Sometime something will piss us off. Etc etc etc... All normal human nature my friend!
But why should that be a problem? The way I see it a robust social system is one where all these natural tendencies can be forgiven while the incentives of the system direct the attention away from those attitudes and towards an attitude of cooperation. When we get there then we will know we are on the track towards success.
Raised voices should not be a problem either. If the intent truly is to make Steemit better ( which is objectively in the self interests of all active participants here ) anyone should be able to speak openly and give specific suggestions for improvement. So then we might look into the art of giving constructive criticism. Maybe something like "This is a terrible way of doing it because of..." could be improved by saying something like "I think a far better way of doing it would be...because then we could benefit like this and like this and like this". If we could share our best ideas for how to improve things in the Steemit ecosystem in this kind of way there should not be any problem. Because objectively the self interests of everyone here is served by Steemit being a place for great conversations and really interesting original content.
The question is : when someone who does not know Steemit and goes on the site and begins to read articles...what will they see? What impression will they get? If they get an impression of a vibrant creative community where people support each other and learn together and create awesome content which makes the internet better as well as rally behind awesome projects, then Steemit will be the place people will want to be. It will draw people towards it like a magnet. And it will be this refreshing new impression in the media landscape of truly constructive and inspiring and original social media.
I have absolutely no doubt about this : A platform which can become a creative community for supreme quality media and conversations is going to transform the whole internet. The world is so ready for something like that now that it is almost ridiculous. People are really fed up with depressive clickbait journalism or debates where people argue like idiots. Something inspiring and fun and useful at the same time is like the unexplored gold of the internet. Social media taken to a totally new level. I say lets do it! :D
we already have the ability to accomplish much of this but, the balance is not yet reached. we have the ability to reward one another for positive contribution. tact can be learned, rewarded. the incentive for each one of us to improve ourselves is right here in front of us. as you say, once we begin to do this, we will become an engine of growth of which others instinctively want to be a part. incentivizing each person being their best self is definitely the path to take to make this the most successful dinner party on the internet. is there, do you think, a way to disincentivize the wealthy and powerful, who, because of their mobs of yesmen, don't care about improving themselves and continually wipe their ass on the tablecloth?
No arguments there - the idea is revolutionary and altruistic - the implementation is piss poor.
Thank you for taking the time to write this great comment, I totally agree with you that healthy communication is key to the success of this project.
One of the reasons I like Steemit, is that, except for the occasional trolls, we are able to communicate in a very efficient and respectful way horizontally, the problem lies in vertical communication, I think the top of the pyramid is not listening enough to the grassroots of this community. One example could be that we have not seen any reply from them to this post, although it has clearly drawn the attention of the community.
I hope healthy communication will be part of the Steemit culture!
With 80% of the STEEM owned by just 215 ninja mined individuals this is not a system you are going to win against @masteryoda - our choice is either to do the best we can and live with it, or leave. A stark choice my friend. I hope an alternative to this can rise. This post may be it. I endorse this post. @mindhunter
In a fight of brute force there's an obvious winner. But in game theory those 215 individuals have the most to lose if abuses stifle the growth of this community. Let's see how eager they are to kill the goose laying the golden eggs.
Those are some of the most wisest words I've read on Steemit - and I've read A LOT on here! POWERFUL WORDS! 10/10!!
Don't you ever leave Steemit @mindhunter !
Let's take into consideration that Steemit is still in beta...for example me when I joined the reputation trait did not exist back then...
Our voice matters and for sure someone will hear it or at least read it ...
Let's hope someone reads it ;) Right I'm leaving....for a cup of tea!
This post is my single daily Resteem.
Mine too! Solidarity @masteryoda
'Accounts' not individuals.
Greetings @smooth - Yes for us, but for the masses no - they are not here to split hairs. Minnows only deal in facts. Many minnows complain to me that the STEEM pre-mine was TOTALLY HIDDEN from public view compared to other pre-mined cryptos which are more blatant like Mazacoin / Omni / Auroracoin etc...the list is endless. I have mined all of these coins in the past.
The Bottom $ is: Would you like your pre-mine blatant or systematic?
There was no literal pre-mine. It was announced on bitcointalk like thousands of other coins have been (twice in fact, since it was relaunched).
Not many participated since it was not promoted and was a little technically challenging (though the relaunch had a community-provided mining guide). This of course was by design. Not "hidden" though. More like hiding in plain sight.
I think you missed my key point though. There are far fewer than 215 major SP holders who got staked by the early mining. More like a few dozen at most, a good number of whom were Steemit employees or contractors.
@smooth So let us call it a blatant pre-mine compared to a systematic hiding. To me this is irrelevant. This BIGGEST question of all is how we address it?
In fact, every pre-mined cryptocoin has ultimately failed - whether the pre-mine was hidden or purely blatant. Steemit is not an exception.
We must adapt or die. Just ask Ethereum.
...Mmmmm...all this sounds like a post for today...
Why Steemit Needs To Reach A Unanimous Agreement To Hardfork Like Ethereum - To 'Smoke Out' All That Blatantly Pre-mined Steem Power (SP).
Yep, and when I agreed and said so, my fairly consistent whale votes dried up as well. This is not the decentralized and distributed system they describe in the white paper, because, as of this writing, the gate keepers are those with the steem power to prevent others from ever even reaching that level. The only way this could be fixed would be for someone to buy in with more steem than the larger whales to unseat them. If this is Dan's vision of an alternative economy, it looks suspiciously like the American and world economies we already face, where the rules protect wealth and the wealthy are the only ones with access to the rule makers.
The decentralized and distributed system is false advertising at this point!
I helped moderate the biggest Buddhist chat board on the net back in the early to mid 2000s, we deal with these issues through a voting system of moderators. The members never knew or saw all the discussions we had, the struggles and work dealing with so called disruptive or abusive posters. Eventually we were sued by a rogue Zenner, Zennist are such a pain in the ass...hahaha...hacking also took place and when the board lost all its data. Anyway, I don't know if this place has a moderators forum or posting rules, this may help. Ego/reputation, and with this board, money, on the eternet and coupled anonymity bring out the worst in people.
Thanks for sharing your experience, it’s definitely something that can be used in Steemit!
This place is very calm compared to the chat boards like Buddhism.alt and esangha, people don't want to lose reputation and potential of making money. I can understand how this would lead to fear of speaking up...I'm tired of fighting so usually I don't get involved, most communities have rules...every species I know of has a pecking order of some kind, it helps keep order when. Let's say, dogs for an example know their place in the pack, this helps keep order and amazingly is soothing to the dogs. Without pack order dogs become very nervous and act out...So posting rules really helps...People Are also not very logical or reasonable and we also have people from all over the world with differing social rules, much like esangha, a fact sheet might help with a board of moderates that are elected that represent the flora and fauna here...
Well said indeed, I think written rules are a requirement, people cannot be punished when no rules are explicitly defined.
Even anarchist have social rules ....haha, people will whine, but just like dogs feel better knowing where they stand in the pack.
It is a good ideea @masteryoda !
Now the problem will be how to implement it ....
Flagging is really a problem...and now let me give you my example...
I used the flag button very rare....and only on posts that are trully abusive...
like the ones with stream and ...just copy and paste with no credits or even added a single word in the post. My opinion is that this is the correct way to flag ...I mean only posts that are are abusive.
But I saw posts with picture credits and long and complex content (very good I can add) that the were flagged...not by Cheetah but other persons.(I will not say who).
Those big, complex post....I know that you create something like that, it takes a lot of time and effort because I do the same in my post...I put time and effort to create something nice....And for those one who create such beautifull things ...I will never flag...because its their work...
What I mean @masteryoda is that you are right and this flag situation must be handled with more care...because somehow...some users...find a way to hurt you...the creator.
And it is so sad ...when you get flagged ...other users(see the flag)...will not upvote you anymore.
100% those who flag good and hard earning posts are abusers ...and want to just tear a person down and discredit him or her!
Yes flagging was used as a punishment!
I believe Flagging have been misused. Those that have the Power are doing them wrongly.
You are making very good points, and I totally agree. I would go even further, I want Steemit to be totally decentralised, and community governed, like a DAO.
But what you suggest is definitely an improvement.
Let´s put pressure on the leadership. After all other platforms will be able to offer more egalitarian environments. If Steemit.inc is not willing to change, users will start voting with their feet,myself included.
Very good post @masteryoda and I agree on the matter, too much power can corrupt. Followed!
one question, do you think spoiled children with a devotion to illogic masquerading as logic and godlike powers will ever vote for themselves to be defanged and declawed? i have read some of the extended posts by these giant children and in my assessment, they are not acquainted with logic, nor have they ever viewed it from afar.
'defanged and declawed' - that is the line of the day for me - and I've read A LOT today!! I agree on the logic score. We need to defang these children and start letting some adults into the room - FAST!!
defanged and declawed, comes from some classic literature, i think Aesop.
I will hunt it down ;) Thanks.
what flavors does it come in? cool stee-mint?
I keep considering doing a post with nothing, but various whale comments throughout the community. I also fear being flagged and I have worked really hard on my Reputation.
i think the whole conversation here boils down to, what else can we do except bare our fleshy throats and hope the bloodthirstiest of the whales don't bite. i will help you however i can. without other whale support, of the more beneficent kind, what is there that can be done? let me know what i can do, short of ending with my head in a basket.
Depending on wat you say I guess @whatup
They just can't simply down vote because of some partial views
Some whales are down voting for $value, and others because they want to silence any information regarding negative views on SteemIt. I don't know what if anything we can do about it. I feel it just adds to the those who say SteemIt is a Scam. These "kids" do not understand when you silence people it make it look worse.
I was an early adopter of Facebook. Mark Z, was your first friend back then. He didn't go around deleting posts that talked about. Myspace.com, and there were a lot of harsh words back then. He wasn't the all powerful Mark Z, yet either. He was just mature enough to let it all play out.
I don't know mark.
I definitely think is not right just to silence everyone just like that.