I just got an upvote from Jerrybanfield.
I didn't know he was still at large on Hive. So I went to check out his page, and his last post was in March. All of his content gets downvotes to $0 every time from @buildawhale, @themarkymark, and @gogreenbuddy. I'm not opposed. But I do wonder if some of these larger influencers are simply nixed on votes automatically by these groups, or if it is a selective process...?
Imposter Syndrome
As a grateful minnow with imposter syndrome in my DNA, I do wonder sometimes if bigger investors/influencers should be allowed some leeway to "cash in" on their investment with the votes? Or if there should be a written code forcing them to stake their earnings for the typical 20% ROI, since it is clearly something that is frowned upon to do otherwise?
Fragile Ecosystem?
What would happen if one of these larger "downvote" tycoons were to leave? (Although, to do so would mean they'd likely power down, which would go against what they stand for, so...?) Still, it seems like a fairly precarious eco-system if it's stability of value is largely dependent on the diligence of vigilantes in managing the distribution of voting stake.
Well, I'm sure we're well past that discussion that sprung forth from the fertile grounds of Steemit oh so many years ago.
It is objectively interesting to see how the ecosystem here is still alive and kicking though. I'm fascinated by the philosophy that goes into these voting decisions and programs.
I do wonder why Jerry is still curating though? Super weird...what is the benefit of that unless you make the vote count. His estimated value currently is only $300. What's that about?
Jerry is just on auto pilot, a lot of people still delegate to him ignorantly, so he will squeeze every cent out of it.
It's a selective process, at least for me.
Thanks @themarkymark. I don't track enough of your downvote actions enough to say whether they seem selective or not. So I am taking your word for it as I obviously can't speak to it. I've seen the benefits of the work you do long term. But it appears there are some who believe your heavy hammer has no distinct rules.
I'd be curious to know what your selective process is and what is your end goal. Do you have certain types of posts/creators that are your focus? Is it for the purpose of control of stake? Management of good content? Leveraging position on market cap for future investors? I'd love to hear your take.
People say a lot of things, I never concerned myself with it.
I don't really go into why I vote, I vote for the same reasons everyone else, to influence the inflation with the stake I own allows. I am not an emotional voter and I don't downvote people because I don't like them or for personal gain.
You can see my response to @sorin.cristescu in regards to @jerrybanfield here.
Gotcha. Thanks. So it's less about "who" or "what" and more about keeping the value of the stake from deflating. Sounds like it's keeping "lazy" investors from reaping too much too quickly, and pushes the idea of holding. That said, where do you draw the line?
There is no line, I vote where I think the inflation should go.
Sounds purely logical. I appreciate the candor.
Do you ever upvote, or is that against your religion?
I used to upvote 200+ unique authors a week all 10% upvotes across the board, then I everything I upvoted or posted got downvoted to zero for over a year, so I stopped upvoting users and focus on projects like hbd stabilizer and burn posts.
The problem with these vigilantes is that it applies a "Wild West" philosophy of "might makes right". Whether Jerry Banfield should be welcomed back or not is immaterial as long as the powerful hammer of his down voters strikes down his content.
I argued at length that we need to adhere to a set of principles and values and then frown upon "private justice",.militia-style, like what the Marky is doing. But it's probably easier to start herding cats. I miss Justine / @llfarms . She was a voice of reason and had the right analysis. She's not back, alas.
If you want to reward him, feel free to send him crypto or fiat. No one can stop you from doing that, but he won't earn a dime here as long as I have stake.
I know most people have no spine or ethics or even gives a shit about principles. When someone goes around saying Hive is a scam and it is going to $0, there is no reason they should do so while earning rewards there. I could go into many other reasons as well, but this one is more than enough.
I'm not saying you are wrong about punishing Jerry specifically. Perhaps he deserves to be chased away. I'm just saying that this is not up to today's legal standards of "due process" and resembles the era of the Wild West. There is no independent "Hive Court" in which Jerry to be tried and deemed "non grata". It's basically you who judged him, found him guilty and chased him away. Not exactly a progress when compared with the "outside world".
There is no due process there is no courts, I am using my stake to influence the reward pool in a way I believe is best to the amount my stake allows.
Everyone has the same ability and it is up to them to decide where the inflation should be allocated.
Yes, and that is subpar.
How so?
In terms of governance. Sorry I was so brief, I have some issues with the latest release of Keychain.
"Due process" counts as progress on the evolutionary scale of governance systems. Ideally, when someone does things that others consider bad, there are some systems to prevent conflicts from escalating. There are clear rules of what is considered "good" / not so good / somewhat bad / very bad. A body to assess evidence. An instance where the accused can defend himself. In short, a justice system. But you know all that, if the US is such an advanced country, it's in no small part thanks to its sophisticated legal system.
It's a path of evolution that the Hive community might consider investigating.
Hey @sorin.cristescu nice to see you around! I remember the old chats we had. You were always the smarter of the two (when I was the other part of that equation). How are things of late? What projects are you up on these days?
Hey, littlescribe! 😊 Thanks for your kind words.
I realised Hive is more than a good blogging platform and P2E infrastructure. It's also an excellent bank. So, I set out to create a tokenized, bankless, local, decentralised human organisation: a non-profit called Offchain Luxembourg a.s.b.l.
Instead of a bank account, we use Hive as our bank for collecting membership fees, for instance. We use accounts such as @ocl-trez (treasury) and @ocl-paymaster (current account), publish on @offchain-lux, and have created a HE token called OCLT ... The idea is to test-drive the new European crypto regulation called MiCA. It claims that it supports innovation. So we innovate. "Is the legal framework going to help?"
That is the question we aim to answer.
That sounds simply amazing! What do you mean by "bankless?" What are membership fees for? Do people just buy up OCLT in place of the Euro? MiCA sounds interesting...are you hoping you get permissions to operate like a normative company, or are you hoping for some other kind of support from them as well?
So are you suggesting you are using blocks from HIVE to process your bank transactions, just using a different token? I absolutely LOVE seeing people building on-chain and off-chain offshoots of HIVE-related companies and d'apps. This is where the stuff gets real.
"Bankless" simply means that the association does not have a bank account 🤷♂️
Membership fees are for normal operations. We organize events, there are all sorts of costs, such as for instance we bought a roll-up. We paid for some graphic work and we also need to pay for more IT work for our website. We also have a paid intern, for 4 months. 3 months of her internship were paid by the founders. We hope to be able to pay the fourth month from the membership fees (it appears to be a tall order, we need to enroll another 10-12 members quite rapidly).
The OCLT economy is the interesting part, the idea is to have a weak token that is spent more easily and more freely than the Euro, following Gresham law ("bad money chases away good money").
MiCA is just a law. You can't expect support from a law. Also, we can do anything we need as a non-profit, no plans to become a company. The good thing about MiCA is that you don't need to ask permission, it's the other way around: you notify the authorities "I plan to do that and I comply because this-and-that". If they don't object actively, it means you can do it (so it 's "permission by default unless the authorities actively object").
I didn't get the last part of the question - OffChain Luxembourg has HBD as pivot "money" (OCLT is not widely accepted yet.) So when OffChain Luxembourg gets paid, whatever it gets paid in is converted to HBD (and saved unless there is a need to spend). When OffChain Luxembourg has to pay, someone does the "payment processor" paying in € and OffChain Luxembourg reimburses in HBD.
Don't worry about that part. I'll just do it for you for free! Granted, all you'll get outa me are doodles of stick figures mostly, but it's free. So...you probably shouldn't complain about it.
Sounds like you've got some econ concepts down. This is all very fascinating. When I'm in a place to shill ya better, hit me up! I'll do eet.
Thanks a bunch,I will !
Yes, I was wondering if the "might makes right" philosophy was simply a matter of greediness in itself, or if there was some long term altruism in the utility of it. @themarkymark is commenting on it above. Maybe I'll pick his brain a little. It's been a minute since I've been in the thick of things. I'm coming with a more impartial perspective these days.