Thanks for sharing this information. I'm interested to see whether they actually put up a source. There's been a long history of abuse on their behalf, but I certainly do acknowledge and appreciate when they catch someone legitimate.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think they used to add the source, but the comment came across as being too accusatorial, so they just went with this to ask them to verify rather than pointing fingers right off the bat. Other users were taking it as proof of plagiarism in the past and attacked people. This more laid back approach has limited witch hunts by those who come across these comments on content. It's an innocent until proven guilty approach
I'd consider it innocent until proven guilty if they didn't automatically start downvoting all of a user's posts. Asking first without downvoting is non-accusatory. This is among the big issues I've had with them - they punish before even giving people an opportunity to reply. This scares innocent people away.
I do disagree with those who witch hunt, of course. Proof first! Enact justice the right way.
To be honest, they did already find proof of plagiarism and it's on her to prove it wasn't. The biggest argument is that no one is guaranteed rewards, whether or not it's original, so it's not really a punishment. I disagree with them, but the largest accounts disagree with us and they have the power. This is just an investment to them and they'll say that they are simply protecting it. Now again I disagree, but if code allows it it's the law
Frankly I'm against having a centralized entity doing this job, controlled by one person. Not to mention the fact that this entity is earning A LOT more in DHF funds than they protect by downvoting (primarily) tiny users, but that's besides the point.
This entity alone is the most centralized aspect of Hive, and frankly functions as its own worst enemy, despite the good intentions with which it began.
If we have decentralized entities (individuals) doing the same downvoting, you wouldn't hear opposition from me.
Hope that makes sense, because I'm not against the downvoting mechanism (and the concept of "rewards aren't guaranteed") in general.
I agree, but unfortunately the majority of those touting decentralization don't actually understand it or want it. That's why the HW DHF has passed. People want others to do the dirty work for them. That being said, recently HW withdrew the proposal for 350HBD a day and introduced one asking for much less at 95HBD
Didn't see that! It's a least a bit more reasonable (not to say that I'd support it).
Anyway... we'll see what happens with this user. Not sending rewards just yet.