You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: EIP FAQ

in #steem5 years ago

Good morning (here) @trafalgar. Your account is new to me and I am here commenting on your post due to following a “multiple links trail” of various resteems leading to it …

”That means, we'll need two good actors for each bad actor to bring their rewards down to a point where they might as well be curating honestly”

”I can spend $6000 a month fighting abuse with the full knowledge that at least 75% of that money is just flowing into the pockets of others doing the exact same thing.”

”It's just too expensive and too futile to do anything 'good' in a broken economy. Knowing this, most of us capitulate and choose to just maximize our own stake to mitigate the negative price effects of a failing platform and in the process we make it worse. This is why we desperately need the EIP. I'll likely be switching sides once that's introduced.”

[emphasis added mine}

I have chosen to invest my time in commenting (typically not a profitable use of my time …) on the basis on finding a lot of revealing input on what has been an enormously frustrating part of my “journey” on the Steem blockchain. You have chosen to “shine the light” on it in a way I have not found before now (of course it may be “in here” somewhere, but how do we find content in anything approaching a time-efficient manner …)

”We don't create a set of economic rules that rely on good people to be altruistic for the system to work. We create a set of economic rules that force bad people to do good things in order to be profitable.”

Rather than taking the “high road” and leading by example approach, ultimately, it appears to this Steemian you are proposing that the ancient WIIFM (what’s in it for me) principle will be our “salvation.” If this goes through, then I’m sure we’ll all be very interested to find out if that is in fact the case …

However, the upside is a very real possibility of overhauling this entire platform and converting it into a largely functioning content discovery and rewards platform that it was always intended to be.”

In the hope that you know (as a self-confessed “player,” if nothing else …) more about this subject than the vast majority of the rest of us “in here,” I have supported and resteemed your post. I sincerely appreciate your straight-up style and straightforward honesty in writing it.

Have a good day!

Sort:  

Rather than taking the “high road” and leading by example approach,

We did come from a place where many, including myself were voting honestly around HF 17-19. But slowly, the broken economy overwhelmed us and those of us who didn't outright leave capitulated into turning this place into a toilet.

If we lost the fight when things were far better, there's virtually no hope now of leading by example since a new equilibrium around self voting/vote selling has set in. I think the broken windows theory very much applies here. Our best chance is to reform the economic rules that lead to large scale misbehavior.

If this goes through, then I’m sure we’ll all be very interested to find out if that is in fact the case …

As am I

First @trafalgar, let me thank you for investing the time to reply. Frankly, I am not accustomed to that, from a “whale.” “In here” for over a year now, most of the time, my experience has not been that favorable when corresponding with a “whale” …

”I think the broken windows theory very much applies here. Our best chance is to reform the economic rules that lead to large scale misbehavior.”

You have made a valid case, to my mind, for the point of your post – arguing in favor of these proposed changes. And, I accept your specific point here since, as I said to begin with, presumably you would know far better than most. It is your “straight up” and candid style which is refreshing to me, so thank you for that as well.

At the end of it all, as I have written about before in my own posts, I suppose some like the use of the word “pioneers” in describing what we are going through. “Pioneers” in what? Learning firsthand what it is like to experience the “utopia” of a decentralized blockchain and all that is really happening vs. the “marketing hype” about what might happen. At the core of it, it is dealing with human nature. In all of its “glory” and how to “manage” that, when no one really has any authority “in here” to direct change vs. affect change …

We’ll find out together what the “Top 20” decide is the best course, going forward, as God knows there is a considerable problem which needs an effective solution to address it. The sooner the better …

Have a good day @trafalgar!