Everyone, obviously, has the right to UV and DV as they see fit. In an ordinary world, this would not be a problem, but of course, when it relates to rewards, folk tend to get their hackles up. Personally, I think it's a very naive statement to say, "But! But! You haven't earned it yet!" the potential was there until someone removed it. With this in mind, folk need to think very carefully before issuing a DV, as this tends to alienate people, some of whom will be looking for revenge. Not everyone shrugs it off. This is why I advocate DV with a mandatory explanation; ideally, a choice pick list to stop bell-ends just putting "s" or "Coz" in the DV explanation.
While I have my own issues with how Hivewatchers operates and conducts itself, I do accept they provide a valuable service to the Blockchain, a necessary evil if you like. The point is it should be for HW and HW alone to police the blockchain. It should be HW alone that has the power to block rewards, not powerful accounts with huge HP one could argue those accounts who engage in spiteful DV issuing are just bullies.
You know, even Twitter, which supposedly is now the pits, has a system in place that stops you from retweeting an article if you have not read it. So they understand the dangers of seeing a headline and taking the whole content for granted without actually knowing what is written. Issuing a blanket DV to a service without looking at ALL the content is, in my opinion, highly irresponsible. We have a saying in the UK: "Tarring everyone with the same brush." the danger is innocent people can be affected by actions against a service rather than a targeted response to those unwilling to play fair.
I dream of earning $80; it must be awesome to earn that much. Imagine earning that regularly? I'd definitely feel part of something if I earned that. Still, from what I can see, it's who you know rather than what you post. (Couldn't resist a little bitch moan) #LeSigh
A DV on a crappy $1.00 hurts me more than some healthy account that can afford to lose £80; this is why I think there perhaps should be two types of DV, one for Plebs like me where the DV has no effect on rewards and one for HW and the Witnesses that does affect rewards although there are one or two dubious witnesses IMO. 🤣
Very well said.
Votes on content should be for the author's content not against some other voter and not just because someone is friends or enemies. It is after all, the equivalent of purchasing content in irl.
Thats what the whales in the dvwar dont understand. Many people see Hive as a marketplace as much or more than a social place. If this was to have an analogy irl. It would be running through a farmer's market knocking food & money out of random peoples hands because somebody you didnt like bought something from someone you didnt care about. It denies the consumer (and many more potential consumers) the product it wants to purchase and it denies the vendor the money they want to collect for the product. And ultimately gives a bad rep to the whole farmers market.
You probably didn't see the comment(s) I made on Mastodon.
🤣No. I missed that one.
But thats a good one!
What I can't get my head around is this idea that you haven't lost anything because it has not paid out yet. That's like telling your misses you'll take out with the $20 you'll earn for mowing next door's lawn and then the homeowner refusing to pay because they don't like the finished job! 🤯
So very true. It's like it's just there for a tease until a whale war comes along.
Given people cannot seem to visualise the problem in their head, If I could be arsed, I would do a video of money piling up and a countdown clock and one minute before the payout, swipe it all into a wastepaper basket!
Then maybe folk will understand how devastating getting your potential rewards wiped out is.