RE: Discussing Steemit With Managing Director Elizabeth Powell
Steemit allows members to exploit content ranking. A plagiarist can reach the top slots on the trending page or hot section on their first day as a "content producer" here, while someone who's been here for nearly three years and gets things like this at least once a week...
.png)
...organically, sits way down underneath the plagiarist's post, out of sight, and earns far less than what those who promoted the plagiarism to the front page so everyone can see it, earn.
Now that Steemit earns ad revenue, having content producers with the ability to create something that draws eyes in is far more important than ever before, and they should not be placed under the garbage.
Allow a plagiarist to earn here, all they do is cash out. Cater to those types and it's no wonder the value of the token decreases. I held what I earned and if I'm forced out, that shady behavior again forces another 26000 SP out the door. That's what's been happening. Solid content producers who held got forced out by shady content producers who sell. Think about it.
It went on like that for years and Steemit did nothing.
!dramatoken
As if stinc didn't kick out the chocks on abuse.
They still fluff up their golden boys and we are supposed to just deal with it?
Smdh.
Is this something Steemit can fix? Is this not more of a problem with Steem? What power does Steemit have to police plagiarism any different from Busy.org or D.Tube? Let me do say though, I absolutely do not support plagiarism nor am I okay with it. Considering the more users that join, the more they spend on servers, and they had to lay off 70% off their staff before, I think it's fair to presume the ad revenue is what would fund their company quite humbly in my opinion. Use Brave browser if you want to avoid ads and earn BAT ;)
Since they have BY FAR the most stake, they could downvote the worst offenders. A 1% downvote from the @steemit account would have the weight of a little over $7. They could hire an intern to sweep away the garbage from trending once a day.
Currently not only is there no danger from abusing the system in this way, it's PROFITABLE in most cases.
They could also just completely dump their current trending page and instead use posts voted on from curation guilds. This would be a band-aid and not a solution, but it would be better than the current situation. It's what Steempeak.com does, but it would be a lot more powerful and beneficial to the blockchain and their bottom line to do it here since this is where all the traffic is. This would also make bidbots as a form of promoting posts less attractive and help with that situation.
They could fix their built in post promotion feature, by having promoted posts show up on trending(assuming they didn't do the last idea) This of course wouldn't be able to compete with Bidbots, but again they could just ban bidbots, by using their stake to flag posts that reach the top of trending through those means. They don't need to track down every single plagiarist, just make sure it's not on the front page.
yep
Absolutely some really awesome suggestions here, maybe I can get an interview with someone in engineering and theoritically go through implementing user suggested changes and why they could or couldn't do it.
j/k I couldn't help myself. But yea, that would be great if you could make it happen. Good luck!
Ha! I laughed.
Agreed
You tell me! I don't have time for an interview right now. I've written plenty about what I see as current problems, offered potential solutions as well.
With the coming hardfork, if it goes through, I can see some of these issues going away. With any change though, comes a new set of problems. When I start picking up on them, you can be sure I'll be talking about them.
At this point, it's like yelling at the clouds.
So, Scott. Where in Canada are you from?
Good old Ontario and you? I can agree on that I would like to see Steem improve. Are you a witness?/you should run as a witness.
Majority of us want to see it improve.
Nope, not a witness and that's not the first time someone suggested I do it. I'm thinking about it.
You can find me roaming around Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Awesome, Canadians for Steem! 🇨🇦 You should though.
Once my confidence lost in this project is restored, and I start seeing more of the potential realized instead of squashed, I'll consider it. I've spent enough money and time on what it takes for me to produce the stuff that goes into my posts so I can earn less than a dollar an hour. Spending more is too much of a gamble for me at this point.
As the largest stakeholder they should care about abuse, and the community... I mean what is the value of a token with no use case and a shrinking community.
Add to that a broke centralized company. Seems like watching over the value of the token would be a good use of their time.
Never did anyone suggest or imply they shouldn't care about abuse and especially not community otherwise they wouldn't have even bothered to do this interview. They absolutely should and I'm sure they do, but again they had to lay off 70% of their staff, so naturally I'm sure that's not their first priority
Posted using Partiko Android
Here's your
DRAMA. Don't spend it all in one place!To view or trade
DRAMAgo to steem-engine.com.The proposed EIP aims to turn this type of behavior around. That is it's primary goal, to make the behavior that most would like to see on Steem be the more profitable route for people to take.
Along with that would it not make sense for Steemit to use its considerable stake to combat the biggest abusers that only it's capable of combating?
The EIP, if all goes well, will help, but actually joining the fight would not only push the changes you want to see faster, but also boost morale for a community that feels like Steemit is arming us with swords to go and fight the monsters while sitting on a stockpile of tomahawk missiles.
What is the logic behind Steemit not using it's stake?
It is sec related.
Controlling who gets rewards makes steem a security, or some such.
Stinc should give the blockchain its steem and let the witness supermajority downvote abuse, but that might cause steem to live up to its potential.
I think stinc decided to burn this to the ground just before booting dan.
Consider your sources.
If that's the reason, it should be screamed from the mountaintops. At least that way people would know they're not just negligent beyond all measure.
Yes, there are many moving parts in steem.
I was told by somebody that walks softly, but has big credibility.
It's harder playing this as a guessing game, but it does stretch out the entertainment.
When this is where a marketing expert ceo leads us maybe it's better not to know the full truth.
At 800k steem a month they will be gone soon enough.
They can only sell it once.
Let's hope good actors buy it.
I would assume it's something like people are already accusing them of being centralized so getting involved in the squabbles might cause more problems and make it feel more centralized but I of course would want to see it cleaned up more too
Posted using Partiko Android
Well I typically wouldn't want Steemit to jump in the middle of some squabble between users or anything like that, I'm more referring to huge whales simply using Steem as a money printer. As the largest stakeholder, if there's someone debasing your currency I'd assume you'd want to fight against it if you could(and they can), so it's weird that they don't. I can just about guarantee you'd get zero complaints from the community if Steemit started to use their stake to add value to the system. I'd argue that's their responsibility.
Yes and what about when or if people didn't agree? Do they need a set of guidelines, do they have to establish rules and policies and community standards? How long before they have the same issues as Facebook? People will cheer them on when they do what you want, but that could change. Honestly I'd rather the platforms just be platforms and not publishers like Facebook has become and it's a slippery slope. Again I would love if they helped, but I can see it being just as much as problem as them not getting involved. It's the same reason that phone companies do not ban telemarketers from using their phone services.
Don't get me wrong. When I say ban, I don't mean ban in the same way that it would work on a centralized platform. Steemit doesn't have the power to ban anyone in that way, and that's why it could never become like Facebook or Youtube. What I mean is that on THEIR frontend, they could moderate content. This is actually the reason all accounts have upvotes and downvotes, as well as it being the purpose of them.
Because of the way Steem is distributed, there is an "untouchable" class of abusers, that effectively the community can't moderate. Only Steemit could. The EIP is created to help with this problem, but as I mentioned before, Steemit is the only set of accounts that could effectively fight this abuse in the current system or possibly even after the EIP. Banning in the same way as a centralized platform is currently impossible here, as it should be.
To me that just seems to be a function of Steem and in that way it is like an anarchy. I'd support it at least for moderating plagarism. The problem with moderation for like you know who, there really aren't any community guidelines
Yes, I can see, on the surface and in theory, the benefits. I also know, from experience, since we won't see these benefits overnight, many will be in a panic, before things have a chance to progress. Be prepared for that.
I believe in Steem :) We've got to get on a call to talk Steemit soon!
And why didn't anyone address questions about this two years ago when linearity was being touted as the next great thing to bring in the masses and make Steem and its tokens more valuable?