I should have realized that my decision to mute @azircon based on his downvote campaign against @lucylin would be contentious. I thought it was the clear thing to do based on @azircon's behavior, but that's just my perspective and it is not so clear now.
I have realized that it was a poor decision that I made too quickly and without enough input from the community. I am not sure what the best plan of action is, but I have decided to unmute @azircon based on input from the community.
It seems that many users only care about rewards and price. While those things are important they are not the only factors in my decisions. The only thing that really matters to me is doing what is right.
I thought muting @azircon to protect @lucyling from an unwarranted downvote campaign was the right thing to do, but many community members disagree, and maybe @azircon deserves a chance. This community is much bigger than me and it seems the best thing to do is let this all play out and we will look at this again in the future.
Moving Forward
From now on, if there is a big decision like this, we will try to make it by stake weighted vote. Anyone can make a proposal for a decision that is to be made and put a "yes" comment and a "no" comment.
Proposal posts must be tagged with #pob-proposal and have a 100% beneficiary to @pob-fund to avoid spamming. A vote on one of the comments at any percentage, counts as a full stake weighted vote. More than 50% of stake must vote on "yes" or "no" to make the decision.
As I said in chat, matters like that should not be in a community vote. They should be set in stone by you, made clear to the public, and be unchangeable.
Of course azi and anyone else should be free to use their stake when it comes to upvotes/downvotes, even if it's just to downvote a particular user.
Muting should only be for plagiarists or spammers
If I'm setting rules in stone, a downvote attack campaign is a mutable offense. I'm not sure I should be setting new rules in stone though. I'm trying to understand why you and others don't seem to have a problem with a downvote campaigns like @azircon's. To me it seems to be a problem.
I downvote often, so does many others, and will continue to do so as I see fit.
So does @trumpman by the way :) :)
Actually we downvote together :)
What would it take for you to allow @proofofbrainio to regain his positive reputation?
What things does would he need to do to show you he is serious about his project and improving?
What would it take for you to allow @proofofbrainio to regain his positive reputation?
What things does would he need to do to show you he is serious about his project and improving?
Yes, I'm aware of your downvoting patterns. I'm saying I think your actions are a problem. I'm starting to think you're being intentionally dense.
The community saw who is back paddling. You muting me or not makes no difference to me :) Feel free to do as you please but if you talk non sense or spam I will act accordingly
I am glad that you see that rules cannot be set in stone. They are always debatable, leave space for interpretation and have always exceptions. There is no "general" without the"particular". One requires the other and the less rules are set in stone, the more free people act and behave reasonable. Only the strict riders of the rules find that they are unquestionable, without alternatives, for they have no questions and think that others don't have or shall have them either. ;-)
A huge thanks for thinking this through and listening to the community members. We need this kind of positivity. Stake-based voting seems like a viable solution to me.
Now let's go back to building this into a much better place. :))
agreed :)
only voting to raise pob rep
afaiac, using dv for content disagreement should be bannable from pob; it is exactly that kind of behavior that made steemit untenable
disclosure: lucylin had delegated pob to me some weeks ago
Probably time to come clean on who you are for some transparency and clarity? I am concerned for this tribe if there can't be some transparency. I understand you might want to stay anon for some reasons, I am just hoping those reasons are not 'dodgy'!
I have started my power down. Perhaps there will be someone that will start a POI coin, proof of integrity. I see that POB is now all about appeasement and not really about proof of brain. Any group or organization that would allow one outside individual to Lord it over all the others is a group or organization destined to failure.
I wish you luck on your travels through POB and in bringing it in to a more social modern age, I feel you were on the right track when you muted an individual who stated he only wanted some stake so he could fully destroy an individual account. You made the right move, I am sorry to see you were unable to stick to what was the right choice.
For those that think you did the wrong thing then they should ask why you are at a negative reputation of I believe -3 when I last looked on Hive.blog.
They should also read his comments -
As I said above, I will continue downvote as I please based on my personal criteria, as I see fit. It makes no difference to me if I am muted in POB tribe or not.-His criteria is his criteria, it follows no etiquette - as he implies here -it is still quite clear to me that the project manager of POB is clueless on blockchain technology especially DPOS etiquette.Most down votes are at a reasonable rate and to remove what the down voter thought was the over rewarded portion. Not to remove an account from being visible. Not for removing an account because it thought different.For all of you that have left comments supporting the change of heart: what are you going to say when you start to get down voted because of what you post? Because of your religious belief? Because of your Nationality? Because you believe differently than the man who would be GOD believes?
I saw all the drama and believe me, two wrongs don't make a right. Its essential that a tribe as POB is objective and transparent so there wouldn't be an external need to probe it like there's dirt within. I wasn't in support of muting him in the first place, a round table discussion was only what was needed so that the objective of POB could be transparent. Hopefully, it'll get better from here.
You can be sure this was the best decision you could have made in this situation, @proofofbrainio and the rules for future big decisions are also a great choice.
Let's move on, because the POB project and the users (most of them) are interested not just in the rewards and values of the token, but in the essence of the project (which is inspiring many people to write more and more).
Trying to bring more positivity to the community, I wrote a post to inspire people: https://www.proofofbrain.io/hive-150329/@wiseagent/think-bigger-think-pob-stay-away-from-the-drama-and-focus-on-what-really-matters.
If asked me , i would not have muted him .
You can never come to a understanding treaty or peace if communication is shut of .
And if that means getting crap DV and comments , so be it , ill take that beating , for in the long run my honest word will stand on it's self and there deeds show no value other then envy and fear .
Was it because it was over-rewarded ? .. or did i say something somewhere else , not appreciated ?
Anyways , to me sign's of a not so healthy structure . Like Hive having trouble with it's own second layer structures somehow .,... panic ?
But yeah lets move forwards , take the punches as we go . :-)
Post link please :)
No problem ,.. here it is . :-)
https://www.proofofbrain.io/hive-150329/@small1axe/outrages-beyond-the-fade-out-line
Hmmm.... I can’t even read this post since you were downvoted into oblivion .... will that be reversed also so that we could at least see your posts ? Goof Grief.
Both were wrong.
I think this is the right decision, good move!
And I think the proposals idea is a good development too!
I feel it is a great decision too. I just wish we wouldn't poke and prod each other. Additionally, some clarification could be beneficial. UV - engage. DV - engage. Speaking about the reasoning for approval or not, I imagine, would only serve to improve things in the community.
Edited: changed "I just wish we would" to "wouldn't".
As I said above, I will continue downvote as I please based on my personal criteria, as I see fit. It makes no difference to me if I am muted in POB tribe or not.
After this much discussion, it is still quite clear to me that the project manager of POB is clueless on blockchain technology especially DPOS etiquette. If that is true, it is likely that he will make mistake again. Just like his previous post is a mistake and it is currently over rewarded in my opinion. It doesn't worth 250 POB as it is currently carrying, so I will adjust the reward if it continues to carry it. I am explaining my thoughts here, but I won't do in future before I DV a post. As I DV posts every single day.
Clarification: I meant I wish we wouldn't poke or prod each other.
Thank you for the engagement. My personal reasons on the mute have been addressed.
It is your right to DV if you feel a post is over rewarded. It is system law. It doesn't have to be liked. Voting should not be contested without proof of malicious intent or action. I mentioned that the other day to someone complaining about an over rewarded post.
The communication people provide is important, but horribly captured. Between various tribes and Hive, critical information gets lost over time. Common positions on DV and rewards appears common, but ill-explained. I believe by exploring it further and communicating the findings certain stigmas can be resolved.
Query: DPOS etiquette? I would like to learn more about this if it's outside of common knowledge. If you can, I would appreciate a link. I've been trying to gather up information to disseminate it. For instance, with livingUKtaiwan's article on newbies or Marky's article on markups/engine tools.
I will help you there, simply because you are actually a rational voice among a large amount of people without any “brain” in POB. If I can respectfully say so! Kudos to you for that.
Rewards belong to the reward pool until 7 th day at payout. It is not yours until that day
When one makes a post therefore, there shouldn’t be any expectation of rewards. As it is optional based on net sum of upvote and downvote
Most common usage of DV (other than to mitigate spam or plagiarism) is disagreement of rewards
There is no difference between upvote and downvote other than sign conversion
Downvote is not attack
Downvote doesn’t benefit the caster in any way, neither socially nor financially. It only makes the caster of DV unpopular. Yet we still do it to protect the reward pool. As pool being constant, more lopsided the vote, more net rewards are taken by the lopsided posts at the expense of common users like you.
I DV to protect you.
That’s the etiquette and explanation. This is not an opinion it’s a fact.
There are no alternative facts. :)
Hope this is helpful to you.
PS. If you understand the above, you will see that it is impossible to “take” any rewards away, as it was never yours in the first place.
PS. DPOS = Delegated Proof of Stake; wasn’t sure if you were asking that. Hive is a DPOS blockchain
This is arguable. If a downvoter is also an author, denying rewards to others also increases their own rewards. I'm not saying it's your case, I'm saying there are situations where "alternative facts" actually happen.
This is also arguable. Code-wise, it isn't an attack, but it can be used as such and it has been used as such numerous times.
Considering expectations are human, not code, this is the most controversial point you're making. If you expect humans to act like code, then your actions might be more biased towards your preferences than you thought.
A human judging articles. There is a lot of difference between things that make you upvote and things that make you downvote. Explaining yourself as if you were code isn't logical. No one's questioning the code. You are the one being questioned. Therefore, this sounds more like an excuse to do your own bidding regardless of what other people think, which is, quite frankly, very arrogant.
@azircon @scholaris
You are free to make your own opinion. However, there are no alternative facts. I will not change a single word of what I said. If anyone calls me arrogant; so be it ;)
Excellent. This is helpful. I endeavor to include something similar when I introduce guidelines for plagiarism/moderation. The first release is for review and recommendations only. I need community input before submitting it for proposals. It will be vetted again after revision through the approval process. I expect the approval process to be the longest part.
It took me a long time to put together a lot of what you presented. I had my own ideas and I put pen to paper, but there's only so many searches through peakD that's possible. I've been through all of the POB-discussions at this point. I reviewed as many HW posts as possible.
There are some things that weren't common knowledge:
I am familiar with the DPOS term and significance. I am not familiar with the politics or some of its customs.
One goal of mine with POB is to keep these guidelines at the forefront of the interface. I imagine a time when users, for instance, utilizing the POB-Ecency front can just click on a convenient link to see the policies we develop. Mind you, it won't solve all the issues of communication, but I believe its a start.
This whole debacle never clicked for me until I read this just now.
This right here, is what I would love to see more of!
Yes many people are clueless, and lash out emotionally, but I feel it's due to a huge lack of understanding of THIS!
I guess the only thing I would hope for, is more communication about this, even if it's just a post you link to when you DV, just so there is at least a chance for these people to learn from their mistakes.
I certainly don't expect all the people who are full time creators to have learned how Hive works on the back end, so I treat every situation as a opportunity to educate first, and then DV only if needed.
An idea that I would like to maybe see implemented in a future fork, would be a DV with a drop down of different reasons why they are getting DV, and an other option when you can write a little message. That way there is no confusion, and content creators won't automatically feel like they are being pushed off of the platform.
Yeah all these peepheads are clueless, what spineless brains they have, Haha!
As Azircon says, DVing is something of a duty!
We should all be thankful he does it, it's only really the larger stake holders that can without fear of reprisals. Note he doesn't take being muted on POB as much of a reprisal!
Good decision. As a leader in this wide community you need to look before you leap so that your decision will not affect one in the group.
Thanks for the decision
I like the new way decisions would be made. It will be really beautiful if everytime a big decision is made there's no mention of the pronoun 'i' but rather 'we' all the way!
That is great.
We move on.
Rough seas help make good sailors ;)
Don’t argue with those who downvote you. Because arguments often bring bad results. You do your job. Let them do their work
This is not a proposal post, however one could be made for the decision of whether or not to mute @azircon.
Unmuting him is the good decision
peace 🧠
Well I see that history happens again and always the same, many sailors but not a captain and when those sailors with high voting power fight among themselves, in the end the same thing happens, the price falls and we harm everyone.
And you will think of me "this is stupid" but just think what to write.
There are people who go for the reward and there are people who write an article because they like to write and there are people who write what they write will always win because even if we like it, everything moves for money, and whoever tells me they write without giving it whether they vote for him or not, that's a lie.
I say again I vote in manual and in automatic and I have decided to remove the automatic because I was voting for those sailors but I have realized that there are many more people who deserve a vote than always the same, and this happens when there are many Marines with a lot of power and as is normal if one fights with one, the other sailors will be with one and the other sailors with the other and there is already the problem beginning, and who are the harmed ... you know, the others bone the community and the price of the token
YES. 100% YES.
This whole situation has been enlightening... everyone should take the time to comb through the posts and comment threads of relevant content by both @azircon and @lucylin, as there are lots of high-ranking users chiming in and detailing their positions.
I hope this thread ends up being as dynamic and helpful as others. I've learned a lot! :)
When we deal with power and money, maturity is needed. We cannot let the ego speak louder. A discussion like this should not be externalized, as it destabilizes the entire community and investors may have a negative view of the project. POB is a big project and we need to focus on what matters, which is building a place of knowledge and exchange of experiences.
Congratulations on your decision!
Oh thank God, I hope it's going to be a peaceful week ahead
Dpoll does stake weighted voting, iirc.
The proper response to someone being downvoted is to upvote them, imo.
If that is what suits you.
Yes, it sucks when someone much bigger than you wipes you out, but no that doesn't forfeit their right to speak their opinion.
Some people use words, others use downvotes.
Freedom isn't always the prettiest solution, but it is generally the best.
There were only a few possible actions to be take:
They're all a bunch of bad options and I don't envy being in your position. Whichever one you take, people are going to shit on you.
I prefer pob without all the drama that the higher price imported. Wouldn't mind if we go back to that but I know some rely on the price for their day to day living and I hope they have their plans sorted out.
Will this right the ship or is the damage already done? I guess time will tell but the price of POB clearly speaks for the random drama and how throwing in random things such as this can be VERY damaging to the eco system.
i thank you made the right decision. I will also appeal that you avoid any further altercation with azri for now and focus on your community and ways to improve governance. If possible try to separate your account fo the pob official account. They are two different entities. cheers!
Hey mate, I do trust you even it has not been made transparent who you are yet (would be good though to know!). The muting was maybe a not that smart move especially who you muted and after an invest offer. However I appreciate you defend community members, I asked @azircon btw what the problem with this one account is some weeks ago already, am not a Lucy fan but think he should not be flagged to nowhere (there are other accounts that create more nonsense for more rewards on this chain but I have no time to scan all that) but that is my personal opinion and everyone else can do what they feel they need / have / want to do with their stake.
I only hope PoB will survive this unpleasant happening, currently I am a bit concerned on the entire drama.
😂
Most of the Tribe members are clueless about how this blockchain works; which is fine, as long as it is not hurting anyone or making the chain toxic. Hopefully they have learned some basic lessons, and will try to find where they belong and what is the purpose of this tribe, if any.
There is nothing wrong with muting. A tribe admin have that power and it can be executed without asking or without explanation. As I said before, a tribe is a business and it can deny services to anyone. But at the same time they must be prepared for the consequences. Businesses go bankrupt on opinions :)
Pretty sure 80% on Hive are clueless about the DPOS and the principles indeed, I also get and agree to some of your points, also would prefer to know who is behind a certain project but I still have some hope there. Still the muting thing was not smart in my view and I also have some concerns on certain aspects I outlined in the early days like "positioning, what is the USP, the message, the story of the tribe....." - thx for checking back dude.
Dieses Gerede von überbewerteten Posts etc. ist doch alles totaler Quatsch, die meisten Flags sind persönlicher Natur, wobei die Downvoter sich dann häufig hinter der faden Ausrede verstecken, ein Post sei überbewertet.
HIVE wird von Early-Minern und ehemaligen Bidbotbetreibern kontrolliert (viele davon zugleich extreme 'Markymizer' ähm Maximizer), die sich überdies noch Witness- und Proposal-Votes gegenseitig zuschanzen. Eine Oligarchie 'vom Feinsten'.
Meine letzten 50 K Hive sind derzeit noch an OCDB delegiert, aber ich überlege, die in Kürze auch noch abzuziehen.
Der HIVE-Token hat genau den (niedrigen) Preis, den er verdient!
Da hast in vielen Punkten natürlich Recht, daher am Besten killt die Rewards für Content generell, maximal Rewards 2nd Layer aber selbst da schon Drama und es wird ähnlich abgehen, aber wichtig dass die Chain da oben drüber DApps hat, Business Use Cases, die jemanden interessieren, die Leute anwenden wollen, um mal irgendwann Investoren zu locken und den Preis nach oben zu treiben.
Ich dachte zwar immer, sie wären als Ansporn unerlässlich, aber langsam glaub ich auch, dass bald nichts anderes mehr übrig bleibt, als die Rewards ganz zu entfernen: Kapitulation vor der menschlichen Gier. :)
Yeah!!!
And maybe clueless that everything posted, curated, rewared here in POB is rewarded in hive as well. When they get hive rewards they are happy about them otherwise not. A true POB enthousiast would never care about hive downvotes.
Try to find the first post from that guy in https://hiveblocks.com/@uwelang . Instead of your name write his or hers. Usually blocktrades and others who are fighting the abuse, they dig deeper to see who is who. I wont put the name here, or the link, but I gave you a hint.
Thx mate - my time is limited but I tried - from the first posts via hiveblocks it was not clearer to me (from first account action maybe....), I just did draw the usual conclusions from the first activity / delegations and recovery account "a" to recovery account "b" which showed me a path to a certain witness but not sure - I might have to dig deeper :-)
He did not give lucylin a chance. I thought you did the right thing, I was willing to give a 100% up vote even as small as my account is to help bring you out of the reputation hole he put you in, and recommended others do the same. I will stop my efforts in this regard.
I am sorry to see your change in heart to protect the person that would play God with another persons account.
Such is Delegated Proof of Stake.
@bashadow you are quite reasonable at times and I see you engage in discussion with Galen and Taraz brothers, maybe you can have a discussion about this with them. As they are veterans of hive and believe it or not more knowledgeable than me on this matter.
Again, as I said multiple times, muting anyone (me) is perfectly reasonable to me. It makes no impact to me. I don’t mind it at all. Just be prepared for the consequences. As it impacts the tribe severely.
You have a good day, Sir! I am always open for an intelligent and brainstorming discussion on blockchain.
I use Hive as an entertainment source, Pretty simple there. I don't like Youtube, I don't watch TV, and trying to find entertainment on Amazon Prime is almost impossible. As I mentioned I have been following lucylin senseeverittmdicky used to post on steem, that was where I found his since of humor and entertainment.
I have had my differences with frot, smallaxe, whatsup and several others that would frequent and comment on his post. Not all my comments on his post have been one hundred percent in the backing of his post.
You decided to play GOD when it came to his/her/it's account. You decided that there was no redeeming value in his post/content, despite the fact he had dozens of comments at time on his post.
I saw the retraction of proofofbrianio on his decision to mute you. You have been un-muted over there now. I saw the comments of those who believe the muting of you was wrong. I do not think it was wrong, I felt he did the right thing at the time based on your statement the only reason you wanted 10000 POB tokens was to finish off lucyin account.
I am done with POB, perhaps one day in the future there will be a POI - Proof of Integrity, coin that I can participate in.
POB means nothing to me anymore, they may have brains but no integrity. So do what you feel is right, and I will do what I feel is right. In the matter of @lucylin and his account and his since of humor and entertainment factor you and I are never going to see eye to eye.
There is nothing wrong with that :) Enjoy you day, Sir!
Oh! Happy father's day!
Friend, your decision and your rectification are great, thinking about your community before you is one of the burdens that you must carry on your back as a leader ... I think that just thinking like this makes you great ... in other communities they silence you for less and they do not reconsider or even change their decision. I believe that anyone can make a mistake, but it is wiser to rectify.
delegated 2k hp, is there any other action needed on my end, or is the pob delegation from you automatic?
Hello proofofbrain these is a great post.i have been following you about your awesome ideas.thses is a good pleasure,that boost our efficiency in the crypto currency market.thanks #pub_funds
Hey there, can you post an introductory post about you? You either sound like a script or you need some help with HIVE because you are out of RC.
Because I voted for 3 times, I don't understand if I voted for 50% the first time because I changed the vote twice, because by doing that, having 125 pop made me now have 75 pop, can you give me one explanation to this?
https://prnt.sc/19lpvvj
https://prnt.sc/19lq1vi
https://prnt.sc/19lqexh