You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Community Guidelines
The referees are:
In the future @referee system where users are elected the users will provide their own account for voting. We'll then just assign the posting authority of one of the following accounts to the elected account. We wanted to give referees the ability to referee without the fear of repercussion on their own content. For that reason we don't require referees to identity. In the future this will still be true as referees may create an account for the sole purpose of refereeing.
I'm going to stop flagging on the recommendation of the referee system since this is the case.
There is no point in making my account a target (as it is on other systems where I fight abusers) while those behind the referee accounts (who aren't flagging the abuse themselves) get to hide anonymously after calling it out for others, who's accounts will likely suffer for actually flagging the abuse.
Don't stop flagging if you see something wrong. You are big enough and there are enough around who care. I have been flagging and don't really care if people want to retaliate as they will get crunched.
The lesson I have relearned recently on Scorum is ... bullshit artist who neither have the money to invest anything meaningful, nor possess any skills to build anything meaningful for a platform (much less post quality content) have FAR more free time to chat and blow smoke up the owners of the platforms asses about how much they're helping a platform ... when it's all for their own personal gain.
When someone calls them out on their bullshit/shitposting/self-upvoting comments with sockpuppets/friends/family accounts they go on an insane libelous crusade against those who are publicly calling their actions out, because it's hurting their mission of self-glorification/gain.
Fighting these cancerous individuals on one platform is enough for me. I don't enjoy doing it, it's very stressful and costs valuable time that I could spend elsewhere. At times I simply get fed up with how long it's gone on without being checked and I tend to speak out at that point.
I suspect some of these same people from Scorum now have a foothold here and could possibly have positions on one or more of the referee accounts (I hope I'm wrong), because these types of people like to hide (once confronted publicly) and play victim to anyone who will listen. It's their drug of choice these days it appears ... but I suspect there is an entire cocktail of drugs involved judging by some of their chats I've witnessed first hand.
That all said, I hope this system works out for STS, but I'm going to choose not to support it since I have no idea who is actually behind it pointing the finger at others. Fighting cancerous individuals on one front is enough for me personally and I'm surely not going to blindly support their efforts elsewhere if that's what is going on here. They get enough blind support as it is.
I'll stick to promotion and building apps for blockchains as much as I can. I simply don't have time to fight cancerous people in chats/blog comments on a daily basis, especially on multiple platforms and especially when they've gained an ear with those who run the sites.
If that has happened here, I'm certain it will change in a short time when they turn against the platform publicly due to the price collapsing because those who can invest worthwhile amounts stopped investing/cashed out due to their cancerous presence gaining traction and spreading and the continued shitposting being rewarded as much as a FullHQ post.
It kind of makes it pointless to try at some point and then it spreads.
¯_(ツ)_/¯
I'd second this.
Until the identities of the referees are known I'm stopping (and advising the SBC) to stop buying in.
Yes we don't want the same to happen as on Scorum. The ones who are in control of these accounts should be made public.
I would second this. I would encourage you to use that list as not the end all but rather a quality recommendation guide. If you find that select referees aren't adhering to guidelines then it will be worthwhile for you to be able to voice those concerns.
This will become even more important when elected referees become a possibility as the software is written. We will need community watchers who will be able to identify if there's ever incidents where referees are not acting in the good faith of the community.
I would also argue that working within that list would make you a more electable referee if you were to ever want to run for the position. It would showcase that you can use an editorial eye towards your peers and provide the context that only your personal perspective can provide.
Regardless I thank you for supporting the community and look forward to fighting abuse along side you! :)
That's kinda clear from the post, but who are the people that control those accounts? I don't need to know which number is controlled by whom, but at least I need the general idea about those behind the curtain.