RE: New Rules for the Social Media Challenge - Where am I at on HIVE?

avatar

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

I have engaged in this type of discussion before, since this has been a trending topic lately. Let me start by saying that I have over 3000 HP. I never powered down, but I also never powered up, except for a bit at the beginning, when I was always running out of RC from renting using Peakmonsters.

To me, the post in itself is a contribution to Hive. The rewards are for each person to decide what to do. It shouldn't matter if someone takes out all rewards, stakes everything, or even brings a huge amount of outside money. That should not affect the upvote. However, people are free to upvote as they please and have their own criteria.

Since people are free to have their own criteria for upvotes and not voting is throwing money away, it's understandable that auto votes are used. Not everyone has the time to read a lot of posts. That's why I'm so against downvotes except when they are used to combat exploits or abuse. Downvotes shouldn't be used because you disagree or dislike someone. However, it happens and has already happened to me. It's especially bad because whales can do that without consequences, bullying people as they please.

Anyway, back on using upvotes however people like. Contests are not different. They exist for a reason. In particular, Splinterlands contests were created because the team thought it was better than letting their upvote unused or setting some type of auto vote, which would have been easier. To me, there are 2 reasons. 1) Promote the game within Hive and increase activity in the Splinterlands community. 2) Increase the chances the rewards from their curation go to Splinterlands players who are more likely to use them to buy SPL assets.

With that in mind, it's much more beneficial for Splinterlands if participants use all the rewards from their posts to invest in Splinterlands than any other type of split, especially when compared to powering up everything!

With that in mind, why would they opt for this recent rule change where participants need to keep at least part of their rewards in Hive? That could have only happened because there was pressure from people who put Hive's interests above Splinterlands'. That is not good. Ultimately, the team is free to be influenced by who they choose. However, part of the vote is from the DAO, using DAO assets, which should follow the SPS holders' wishes, not some Hive whales.

Another complaint I have is that the rules are very vague. "Specifically, we will review past rewards earned and currently held Hive Power (HP) as part of the selection process." "Participants who demonstrate an investor mindset by holding and growing their HP are more likely to be rewarded. Those who consistently extract all rewards without reinvesting into the ecosystem may not be eligible for prizes." What am I supposed to do with this? By default, posts pay half in HP (staked) and half in liquid form. That's what I keep mine at but people can change this percentage all the way to either side. Is 50/50 good enough, using all the liquid rewards as we please? Or will that be punished too?

To conclude, I'm not against these rule changes. I am against how they were changed and how vague they are.



0
0
0.000
14 comments
avatar

Great assessment, thank you so much for replying!

I feel the same way about a lot of things you write there, but my faith in humanity (based on the experiences with blogging and social media) is not very high. I would love to be able to trust humans with power, but the possibility of making money corrupts many of them too easily, leading to a degradation of quality - and I still hope that I'm wrong with that.

In the discussion that I had with acidyo, he stated that the think the abuse of those types auto-vote and down-votes is not that high. So the new rules are more a prevention than a reaction towards a problem that might ocurr. That can be seen as problematic and oppressive, or as progressive, depending on the view-point. I tend towards progressive based on the experiences in other blogging/social media systems.

The rules are indeed very vague, I edited that in as well, nobody really knows what they want there... And what you point out is very interesting - why wasn't there a proposal or a vote for the change? Or maybe I missed it, that still happens a lot.

Same goes for the re-investing. I'm one of many who uses his rewards only for SPL, since I don't even know how to extract them into the real world 😅 And the purchases I made definitely help the SPL-Ecosystem.

My conclusion in a question that I'll think about a little as it is applyable to the real world:

Does the mere possibility of abuse justify the preventitive restriction?

0
0
0.000
avatar

Your post is very good too and I honestly think we both agree for the most part.

My faith in humanity isn't very high either. However, I think it's not too difficult to keep the little guy in check, even if there are many of them, and some might escape whatever anti-abuse system we implement. I'm much more worried about preventing abuse from powerful people. I have gotten a few downvotes from a whale for personal reasons and also DVs from another whale because they wanted to hurt one of my upvoters. There's nothing you can do in those situations. If these were happening to most of my posts, I would stop posting. Imagine a new user getting caught up in these situations. I doubt they would stay. Anyway, this part is a little off-topic, so I'll get back to the topic.

I agree with putting some restrictions. I just don't like how and why it was done. Ever since the DAO made the deal to buy a lot of Hive to be able to get the funding for the Splinterlands proposal I have been of the opinion that it should support Splinterlands posts as much as possible. A vote would be just for the DAO part. I do think it's good to make people not cash out everything. However, I wouldn't consider putting the capital in Splinterlands and even other Hive projects to be "taking out of the ecosystem". The biggest problem is the rules being so vague that someone might get rejected when they don't even know what rules they have to follow.

Oh yeah, I also don't know how I would cash out of Hive and I put everything into Splinterlands. Hopefully, one day, I'll learn how, because if I want to cash out it means prices had increased significantly.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

I agree with the whole comment, I think @azircon should really read it.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I have read the comment and responded to it.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

Hive interests are important and is INDEED above splinterlands when it is related to hive. Hive stakeholders are free to do whatever they want with their stake and their vote. That includes you.

But if that is true I am free to vote (and downvote) how I choose :)

Splinterlands is "Powered by Hive": not the other way around. You are entitled to your opinion, just as I am entitled to mine.

I didn't ask you how you vote, so I appreciate if you don't ask me how I vote :)

By the way, I have checked your account, and you do plot at a decent spot. Congratulations.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Everyone's interests are important. For me, my personal interests are very important, for you they are not. For Splinterlands, their own interests should be the most important, regardless if they are using Hive or any other type of currency.

I agree that everyone should use their upvotes as they wish. Downvotes is a different issue, not related to this. I know you don't agree with me regarding DVs so it's not even worth it talking about that.

I know Splinterlands is "Powered by Hive" but that doesn't mean Splinterlands dies if Hive dies (hypothetically). Splinterlands is a private company that needs to ensure their own survival and profit. Regardless, when I say that for Splinterlands it's better if people use all their Hive to buy SPL assets instead of powering up Hive, I'm not saying that it is what we should do for the contests. I'm just saying that it would be better for Splinterlands. But it would be very difficult to keep track of that, certainly not worth it, even if there was the desire to. Keeping track of HP is much more simple.

I didn't ask how anyone voted on Hive. As an SPS stakeholder, I do have a say on how the DAO is voting, though.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine.

Yes your interest and only your interest is important to you. That is why you act the way you act. Only in self interest.

For me: my interests are important AND the community interests. I act accordingly. This is the premise of game theory of governing dynamics. I suggest you watch this clip. This conversation is over on my end.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I do have a say on how the DAO is voting, though.

No you don’t; unless you forward a proposal.

And then you will have a say proportional to your SPS stake.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Every stakeholder has a say proportional, of course. And the way the DAO voted changed without a vote.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Say all you want.

But now you need to be prepared for consequences of your actions.

Have a good day, Sir!

0
0
0.000
avatar

I honestly don't understand you. How can a normal conversation without any type of attack or rudeness turn into "you need to be prepared for consequences of your actions". What were my actions that were so wrong?

0
0
0.000
avatar

What makes you say I only have my own interests in mind? What have I ever done that makes you think that?

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

You did yourself!

Everyone's interests are important. For me, my personal interests are very important,

0
0
0.000
avatar

I said that my personal interests are very important to me. I didn't say that only my personal interests are important to me. And I said that my personal interests were not important to you. What I meant is that everyone has their own self-interests in mind, which there's nothing wrong with (unless they only have those in mind), and that it's also normal for other people, especially those who aren't close to them, to not have that person's own interests in mind.

0
0
0.000