Hi, I disagree with your idea here for reasons that were demonstrated in my post on this subject. I specifically asked my upvoters to comment as to whether they manually upvote or not. Many of the larger ones came forward to say that they manually curate and manually upvote - reading my posts and upvoting them because they like them. This fact was completely denied by the downvoters because it was inconvenient to their narrative. So, no, auto upvoting is not the cause of the issue - it is often just a convenient cover for other reasons that aren't expressed by the downvoters as they know they would lose face if they did actually state them publicly.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
In your specific case, I'll take your word for that but in the huge majority of auto voted accounts with huge rewards they absolutely don't get read. I could give you an example right now where someone with huge auto vote on each post actually reposts mixed in old content and because no one ever looks at his posts, no one ever noticed or if they did, didn't care as they were reaping huge curation rewards.
The use of votes is simple and based upon PoS upon which this blockchain is founded. You understand balance, so surely upvotes and downvotes provide Hive with balance?
You cannot have proof of stake without both and a personal choice of how to use that stake. Whether you agree with their use of stake or not is unimportant as you also have the same choices as they do.
I know in your case, I believe they are downvoting more to do with content than reward which I wouldn't generally agree with but again, that's me and although I have a right to express an opinion, I have no right to demand how anyone uses their stake.
I am sure there are a lot of accounts that use auto upvotes (or even manual upvotes) to farm the reward pool and I agree it is a problem for Hive. I also agree that it is probably a problem that requires human involvement and that downvotes are the main tool currently available to resolve this on Layer 1. However, obviously this leaves us the massive grey area and potential shitshow where power is focused into the hands of a few people to 'police' this issue, yet without them really having had to pass any tests or demonstrate any capacity at all for understanding, ability to research or to be even handed. In real life, police have some semblance of oversight and if they really go too far they get arrested or even killed in retribution. On the blockchain, none of this happens due to the design of it all - so all we are left with is what we have - a mixture of ill will, annoyance and strategies to fragment - combined with posturing of greatness and of 'serving the community'.
The bottom line is that the more complicated a topic is or the further it deviates from 'convenient narratives' that are commonly heald by people - the more they are likely to experience cognitive dissonance and want to shut down the information. This is universal in humanity and is a huge problem. Courts are designed to try to address this in 'the real world', by having all of the evidence brought forward and to try to reach an objective outcome. Again, we don't have that on Hive - we just have a handful of people shaping the narrative as they see fit. This is neither something that facilitates Hive's 'censorship resistance' selling point, nor proof of brain.. Well, it is proof of the existence of a brain, but not necessarily proof of any excellence, as is the entire point of the POB experiment.
Balance is accurately defined as 'no part or aspect overpowers any other'. So Hive does go further than a lot of networks to achieve that - and that is great. However, POS also involves inherent imbalance in the shape of everyone having different resources available to buy more stake. In the case of the current downvoters, most of the downvoting is coming from two top 20 witnesses who receive contstant large payments from the blockchain, almost regardless of what they actually do on Hive ... And also an employee of the Oil industry - one of the largest abusers of the environment known to man - also known to be heavily involved in massive corruption and illegal wars. While you can argue that the maths of POS are balanced, clearly the inputs in the form of access to resources is not balanced and not based in POB either particularly. This is just a result of how the world is and without radically redesigning the Hive layer 1 reward pool, the only way to create real balance where individuals don't feel overpowered is for every person to use real empathy and social skills to interact and create harmony. So far, the downvoters have to varying degrees, done the complete opposite - with some of them preferring to try to be seen as a wild west gun slinger than someone who has understanding of balance.
Under the current system on Layer 1, you are correct in terms of actual legal 'rights'. It would have been nice to think that people with large stake would have sufficient social grace and awareness of business, economics and marketing to make more balanced decisions. In any case, we will let the market decide by opening up Layer 2 solutions and letting the stake go where it's owners want it to. I am excited to see what happens to Hive in coming months as this plays out.
Just cause you asked them in one post and knowing you all are connected through Discords etc doesn't mean they've mainly been manually curating. You literally tagged them all as well, naturally many will come out and say it was manual to help you and your narrative out. Considering the lack of engagement in general most of these authors the same curators vote it's hard to imagine it's all manual votes after having read the posts but not taken an extra minute to leave a comment which they literally are incentivized to do since comment voting exists as well.
Autovoting is a big reason to farmy content, lazy curation on same authors constantly and overrewarding because the votes are often the same no matter what the content because they don't read them. You can't dispute this fact. You also can't keep trying to defend it as "they just want to support them because x/y when most these authors do is just cross-post their content and the voters close to never tip or use recurring payments to want to actually support and the content to continue to occur out of sheer interest of consuming it on Hive. It's just blanket statements for wanting said upvotes to continue to get a big chunk of the reward pool for a niche that is very small on the internet in general and only now is gaining more traction due to all this covid misinformation, monetization and fearmongering from spinning articles and posts from reddit and other places in your own words just to make money. Naturally this is your main reason for doing it, knowing jamesc and xeldal are supporters of such content and expecting to maximize their influence on the rewardpool without any disagreement in the way and when that happens you all lash out as proven time and time again.