This is outrageous. Regarding "Copy/Paste 'abuse'" attributed to me [1][2][3], I have several things to say.
I was targeted by haters who tried to cancel me by downvoting everything I posted lately, posts and comments alike, from several well established accounts. [4]
First thing they did is reported me to Hivewatchers and gloated with glee when I was instantly(!) blocklisted, without warning, making you an accomplice to Cancel Culture on Hive. Is your blocklist permanent?
Alleged misconduct is absurd. Is it forbidden to post famous quotes as fair use (a concept recognised in Copyright laws)?? But god forbid if quote is contributed with the link to original post where author himself posted it outside of Hive, right?? When I joined Hive, I read all guidelines I could find and I do not recall warning that accounts who posted quotations or links to external resources will be reprimanded for doing so. How is it possible to discuss author's posts without ethical referencing?? ("He Who Shall Not Be Named" posted something I should describe without mentioning it?)
Specifically regarding [1], a link to the original author's video (serious, non-entertainment content), with original author's description of video, properly tagged and attributed (with proper Markdown quotation formatting), accompanied by brief comment of mine ("Excellent argument against political authority"), in the community dedicated to work and philosophy of this very author.
There is absolutely nothing that could be considered as "abuse" in that post. There is no attempt to misrepresent content as my own, and due credit to author was given. I have discovered that video, I watched it, I considered if worthy of sharing, I composed proper post about that to promote work of that well acclaimed author for Hive audience.
Discovery of meaningful content is an important responsibility, which is acknowledged on Hive as curation. One way to think about it is curation of external content. Instead, would you rather see a meaningless selfie, or a photo of a cake, or a cat video, that tell reader nothing worth knowing?
Since most content (philosophy, history, literature, entertainment, art, etc.) exist outside of Hive, trying to lock-up Hive and forbid external links as well as responsible citation is a disservice to Hive.
Now, consider that I have something valuable to share, like insightful quote of a philosopher -- a wisdom expressed way better than I ever could phrase it. A something that can make readers a little better, or help them to understand something, or aid their predicament -- a meaningful content. Should I distort original author's description, to avoid accusation of "Copy/Paste abuse"? Would it even be ethical to do so? What would be "improved" as result?
Is your policy is really "don't post about anything outside of Hive"? How can society discuss current events then, if they are almost always reported elsewhere?
If I am to share a musical video from a musician I like, in hope that readers might appreciate his work also, which have a greater value for reader -- original music clip of the artist, or my redundant commentary?
So regarding [2], it is the same thing as above, but without my annotation. In [3] I responsibly shared video of a different author, with political commentary.
Authors themselves would not object to sharing their content in this manner, and you should not object either. Your policing could benefit from alignment with "fair use" concept.
P.S. Note how there was no attempt to "milk rewards" from sharing those posts. In the Anime community where I regularly contribute original commentary (more than hundred posts already), most contributors consistently get rewards few hundred times greater than mine, because most of them boost their rewards by leveraging upvoting cartels that I refuse to use as a matter of principle because I consider that unethical. I care about meaningful content, whether mine or someone else's, and I post more than just well-annotated links to external resources. Due to downvoting attacks that already brought me among top-10 most downvoted accounts on Hive (according to https://hivealive.io/untrending), I would have to burn all rewards from now on. Besides, unlike those using upvoting cartels (e.g. ocd(b), "curangel" and other organised automated "curators", Hive SBI, etc.), I would have never gotten rich on Hive anyway. With or without rewards boosting, meaningless/unimportant content tend to get more popular than what I'm interested in.
P.P.S. I have no intention to "appeal in Discord", because I'm not going to join another social media to beg you for mercy. I have explained enough regarding your misconduct to clear me from all accusations. Please consider what I wrote and adjust your methods accordingly. Apology would be most appropriate. (Also please remember to remove me from blacklist). Thanks.
P.P.P.S. Only few days ago, if I had to advocate for Hive I would have said that one reason (among many) why Hive is good, is because Hivewatchers identify and discourage misconduct.
As a person familiar with Netiquette, online forums, usenet, responsible moderation, etc., I know that healthy community have to discourage wrongdoers, or it will be overrun by haters and trolls. I have supported Hivewatchers and Spaminator through HP delegation; I have reviewed hivewatchers' abuse reports and even considered volunteering for Hivewatchers to keep Hive community healthy. I agree with reprimanding of many notable cases of abuse, I discourage use of AI in any form, etc., etc.
Hive is the only social network where I want to be. I want it to thrive. That's why I contribute content, bug reports, fixes, and reactions (whether up- or down-votes). That's why I operate a witness node. That's why I wrote this reply.
You idiots are destroying this platform.
Dude, all u did was post videos you don’t own from big YouTuber accounts. You copied& pasted there intros. You didn’t write a single original thing. Stop lying and just correct action. And the account who seemed gleeful was a guy u had been DVing. You sound like a child. Grow up! You are the biggest hypocrite I’ve ever seen on this platform. Unbelievable!
No original content was created in these posts. It takes seconds to copy and paste a link to a video or text.
This type of no-effort posting should have had its rewards declined.
However, it could still be considered cross-posting spam littering the chain.
What if I want to share something without adding noise or my redundant commentary? What if I want to invite conversation by introducing content to discuss first, without my opinion which I will share in reply to comment(s)?
No, it is far from "no effort" posting. If waving reward from such posts is a best practice then I shall do that for my future posts, provided that you remove me from blocklist. Instead of blocklisting, you could hint that suggestion, or say that continuing such practice could lead to blacklisting, couldn't you, instead of aggressively striking me right away. Note how you reprimanded one post of mine regardless of my original commentary. Do you wish to dispute size and quality of added content, to qualify for reward and immunity from your misconduct?
No, it could NOT be "considered cross-posting spam littering the chain". Spam is characterised by excessive and/or redundant posting. One unique post per day in the appropriate community dedicated to exactly such content can hardly be considered "spam", let alone "littering the chain".
What actually is "littering the chain" is "original" meaningless noise in posts that tell readers nothing worth knowing yet rip massive rewards from upvoting cartels -- a something that can be found on Hive in abundance.
Originality of content is overrated. Original content can be spam, rudeness, vulgarity, hate, lies, slander, disinformation, sensationalism, fear-mongering, etc. Original content can be meaningless noise. One might even question whether truly original content even exist, as we are all influenced by culture, hence to some extent almost all "original" content is a derivative. Suppose I am to post selfie, or photo of something that I ate for breakfast, or narcissistic post "look, I'm waiting for a train" (like if everyone must know), or boring photos of food or cats -- is that "original" if millions of people do the same, and were doing the same since a while ago? What if non-original content enrich Hive community more than my blabbering?
Discovery and sharing of worthy content is equally important or even more important than trying to produce content of your own. At least I hope you'd agree that good balance is to be found.
One more thing: when I post such videos, I add appropriate tags, as per content of videos which I check prior to posting. It takes much more than "seconds" to prepare post for publication like that.
Since I post nothing without careful selection and consideration, selection of content, its checking and categorisation is where most time is spent.
I don't want to play technicalities with you to qualify for your ambiguous criteria by adding something like "excellent commentary", "no comments", etc. Not all content worthy of sharing is worthy of writing an essay about it.
Regarding, "It takes seconds...", "no-effort posting...", how much effort should be involved, exactly? Even trivial post may be difficult to compose for someone with poor health, disability, cognitive issues, poor comprehension of foreign language, etc.
But in reality, it is hard to believe that you actually care about effort: if I am to provide you with a "proof of work", proving that I typed all the text instead of pasting it, would you say that it is OK then, even if result is indistinguishable from copy/paste?
I have made number of posts where I accompanied video with partial transcript that you might also say is lacking "original content", but I assure you that transcribing spoken language is not a trivial effort.
For me, preparation of video for posting takes duration of the video plus some minutes (not "seconds", as I do that manually without automation) to properly tag and compose post, unless I also took notes (or partial transcript) to accompany the video. Also, because I do not repost all author's videos, some time is spent/wasted on processing videos that I decide not to share.
Another example is a grief quote that I posted recently. I had dozens of browser tabs opened with shortlisted articles. Since I have other commitments, and because this material is emotionally difficult to process, I was on and off the task for two weeks(!) carefully filtering articles through my own experience, dismissing most of them, until I was lucky to find one small fragment worth posting. Total time spent in research was up to two days(!), just to share a small quote. You have no idea of effort involved.
Let aside questions why it should be difficult to post, and what is presumably improved if poster dose more work...
So what if "original content" was created by someone else? Most of mankind's knowledge is second-hand. Not everyone should be writing books or making music. It is OK to point out good content. Friends do that all the time, teachers do that all the time, etc. The point is not to re-create knowledge from scratch or reinvent the wheel but to filter and process information. Are you against sharing? If you learned about something good, why mentioning it to your followers should be forbidden? Your output does not always enrich someone else's content.
Apparently there is a #posh initiative to encourage posting links to Hive content on other social media platforms for reward. But posting links to content outside of Hive is punished by blocklisting??
By the way, why am I still blacklisted? I did not know that I'm supposed to decline payout when posting external links, and I agreed to do that from now on. Please unblacklist ASAP and remember that I've made significant contribution to Hive in anime community where I posted hundreds of posts/comments with original commentary.
Also, consider applying Proportionality Principle -- idea that punishment should be proportional to the crime -- to avoid being seen as aggressor on Hive.
Effect of your crusade against responsible citation is predictable: people would distort original material, misrepresent its origin, and avoid giving attribution -- all that will only exacerbate problems on Hive, making your struggle against AI-generated noise even more difficult. Please realign your priorities.
P.S. I fully support resistance to AI-generated noise.