RE: Who Will Down Vote Haejin After the Fork
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Free flags are only an opportunity cost for the defenseless unprotected small accounts that will have no impact, and risk having any future growth stunted perhaps forever thus killing any ethically motivated flagging from the largest majority of active steemians.
All I know is that even though redfish and Minnow witness votes only account for a negligible percentage of total votes they tend to take notice when they lose their votes. Especially, from loud steemians, and definitely from the dolphins that make an impact. Sure, getting the freedom vote trumps all but basically what I'm saying is the only clear course to change is removing all votes for shit witnesses and demanding more professionalism and accountability from our BP. Nothing will change until we overhaul the decision makers..I also cannot express enough how having an anonymous entity like freedom in the shadows is destroying steem from a philosophical standpoint alone. It's a joke and mocks what decentralisation is all about, transparency.
Fear is the dominant currency on this platform. Kiss assery, apathy, and complacency are next.
Yep, I mostly agree.
Integrity shows and so does lack of integrity. If you know what the right thing to do is, and you choose not to do it... because.. Money.
There isn't enough money in the world to change your integrity. But there might be enough to change your behavior. it's gross.
Sigh, what to do... Seems to be a mass of immovable objects in the chain of command..
Posted using Partiko Android
Fork it, it's open source, and expose exactly who you are, as you want others to do, or shut the fuck up with this nonsense ya hypocrite.
I could bring back numerous instances of you saying "their stake their choice" or something to that effect, I could also bring back plenty of times you not only defended self voting abuse, but bid bots (just today) which is basically a matter of morality, since bidbots are cheating. Buying votes, you call it 'buying exposure' but it's simply buying votes, undermining the reason steem exists.
I disagree it is a moral issue to purchase something that someone else has listed for sale. There are dumb decisions and there is a lack of morality those are two different things.
Also self voting vs. deceitful fake accounts are two different things.
To be fair, I can offer you a slave for sale. Or an assassination service. People can offer all sorts of immoral things for sale.
Again, a bad decision and immoral are two very different things.
You make a point, but really are you going to make that comparison?
A lot of people vote with their wallets based on moral decisions. Such as vegans not going to McDonald's - even for a veggie burger. Or people not spending money on clothing if they disagree with the company's child labour policies. And such.
So morality and purchasing decisions do indeed go hand in hand.
Also, who are honosurf and coininstant? And why are people on this chain such children?
Good point.
Just an unhappy guy with two accounts and he is mad so he is taking it out on everyone else.
You're completely wrong. You can assert to the contrary all you want but as others have pointed out, you most certainly are wrong, buying votes is not OK anywhere in the world. Buying exposure that comes through vote buying undermines the very reason that voting was implemented, to distribute the Rewards. Rewards bought are no longer rewards. Rewards can only be earned.
What if we didn't name them votes... What if we named them visibility points?
Look I am fine with disagreeing on somethings, at the end of the day...
if no one looks at the site and no one curates it's a problem. Label that problem however you want and we all might see a few points differently...
I don't want to focus on that, if people just Downvoted and Upvoted their own personal preferences that would help a lot even though we would still likely have some places where we disagree. Right now, barely any curation is happening.
You can rename rewards to whatever you need to escape the ethical dilemma of cheating at the game, it will not change the fact that you are condoning cheating.
It doesn't matter at all what they're called, it matters what the act of buying and selling them does to the entire ecosystem, from the very premise of why they exist in the first place all the way to who that act attracts and the effects those actors will have in turn. I think I know why you didn't want to explain the reason for your disapproval of certain content not deserving the votes they bought, it's because you don't even want to broach the issue of what is good or bad, but the reason why I asked that was to point out that Vote Buying itself, that proposal, it appeals to a certain kind of person and many will try to deny it, but it a obvious enough, the same kind of people buy sex, they try to entice others with marketing and hype, they are focused primarily on appearance and such superficial things, but at the end of the day, after they came on some strangers tits, after they sold someone the fluff, after they finished spinning their wheels about "exposure" and such vapid things, they undoubtedly know the bitter unsatisfactory taste that it leaves, the net negative, or they are psychopaths and they enjoy using others, they derived satisfaction from such debasement.
Decentralization is not all about transparency, and transparency isn't revealing one's identity. Decentralization is about decision making being done among a consensus of people as opposed to one person or position making the decisions, and transparency is the visibility of actions across the network, not about who is who because that does not change anything and it actually hinders and compromises more than anything, especially when the stakeholder is so heavily invested.
Accountability? Professionalism? What the fuck do you, whoever the fuck you may be, which by your own logic is hidden behind a pseudonym, think this is? Where did you gather any of such insipid requirements for a block producer? The only job a block producer has is to adjust the price feed, which should be completely scrapped, and their other less hands on duty is to make sure that their witnesses do not miss too many transactions, that is all. I heard other ridiculous things, like feduciary responsibility, or that they need a website and a mission statement, as if that has absolutely any bearing or is remotely tangent to basically RUNNING A SERVER. I will await your response, which I bet my entire 300 sp account on, would not turn up to ascertaine exactly why, and how, any stakeholder needs to compromise themselves by revealing their given name, or why and how a block producer must have such insipid requirements.
Well here the top block producers decide on the code that runs this place don’t they ? And since they are voted in it stands to reason that knowing what the people behind the servers stand for and what or whom they are motivated by should be transparent to all.
The rest of your points are your opinion and moot as they have no weight on the fact that this blockchain is an attempt at democratic consensus stake weighted voting. This isn’t a mere proof of work platform, it’s also heavily influenced by its social mechanisms.
You’re also confusing names with our ability to engage with and determine whom we want running the servers here. It’s not about a name or label it’s absolutely about having no ability to ascertain anything except voting habits from an investor that chooses not to reveal anything about their nature on a social media platform.
That doesn’t build any confidence and does nothing to help the ecosystem to reach a consensus for what is best for all stakeholders.
I’ll stop because I know you are very opinionated and I’m not looking to fight with you or create my own fork or interact with someone demonstrating such hostility.
Not at all. Deciding on what code they want to run is entirely up to them. The fact that they are voted does not mean that they owe anyone anything, especially silly nonsense like "what motivated them" or "whom motivated them". Their job is almost entirely singular: makeing sure they don't miss blocks. Nowhere does it say that they owe anyone any kind of explanation or even to reveal their intentions.
No I'm not confusing shit, you are the one that is apparently confused over this:
There is no philosophical standpoint to any of that. Which brings me to your statement that my point about decentralization NOT being about transparency, and Transparency NOT being about identity are debatable. They most certainly are not, do I have to open up a dictionary and walk you through what those things are defined as and explain to you why there's no such thing as "transparency is what decentralization is about" or the insinuating nonsense that transparency means engaging or otherwise participating in the social media aspect of the blockchain?
The point is that there is no need to "help the ecosystem to reach a consensus for what is best for all stakeholders", that's only your naivete which is best dismissed entirely by: trying to please everyone leads to displeasing everyone.
This, Steem, is many different things to different people and that is why there is nothing, like I wagered, that you could point to or reason that will make your case any less ridiculous, it doesn't mean that stakeholders have to participate in all it's aspects, or that the have any kind of obligation to explain themselves and their action to anyone. Nobody owes anyone here any such nonsense as 'so what motivated you to vote or act like this' and anyone who is naive enough to fall for such things, as if that would change anything, best re-examine everything they do in light of that insipid demand they have of others, lest they be a complete hypocrite.
Okay bud
Posted using Partiko iOS
You owe me an explanation, what motivated you to respond with OK? Why is it OK? How is it OK? Or is it simply lip service? Mockery? Attempting to escape your own claims, leaving the conversation behind? Or you don't think your nonsense should be applied across the board, only to your arbitrary measure of how much stake in the system demands that you explain yourself? Even no answer is an answer so my satisfaction is guaranteed no matter what you decide to do.
I owe you nothing, just like your interpretations of the witnesses. Steem is different things to different people. There are no rules and no reason that I should waste any of my life on you. You're an island and your own circle jerk. I don't like your tone and I assure you I will never be bothered to have any correspondence with you again. I'm not impressed by your word salads and idgaf about your opinions. I didn't believe in muting until I ran into you, so congratulations on further diminishing your maniacal influence. I probably wont mute you because you're not worth another a tap of a touch screen. Ignoring your arrogance and ignorance will be easy. Owe you LMFAO 🤗
In other words, you're a hypocrite: you demand others owe you their motivation but you don't owe anyone jack shit the same? You don't care about my 'opinion' but then you subscribe to it nonetheless.
Posted using Partiko Android
#tonepolicing, mute me why don't, or tell me how little you think of me as if I do give a fuck, and that has anything to do with what I said.
#word-salad lol yeah sure.
Posted using Partiko Android