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.
RE: Hivewatchers Report for April 2025 [148 Reports] 🔥