@ryzeonline hi 😊🙏
Warning: Very very long response. Sorry, not sorry 😂😂😂
I tend to be the kind of person who steps back and tries to look at competing perspectives so that I can try to understand all points of view, even if I don't agree with them. The point is "to understand" where people are coming from and why they feel the way they do about whatever the issue at hand might be, without needing to choose between them, although sometimes I do if I feel strongly enough about the outcome and its impact. I believe you have done just this in your story Jay, showing the reasons why each side may have acted and reacted in the way that they did and I commend you for that.
I do think that the key issue here is that when people plagiarise and use other people's content as their own, especially on HIVE, they not only take literary or artistic credit for something that they have not done themselves, but they also take financial credit for it, and in so doing, they deprive authors who are spending valuable hours of their life creating quality original content from earning a fair return. This is because the pool is finite at any one time and if one person gets more, another has to get less. And so the scales of justice and fairness come into play and the intensity of the emotional response is heightened, and this is understandable to an extent. Anyone can copy and paste and become an article generating machine but this kind of behaviour must be checked at some point. In my view, the Hive can be distinguished from Twitter and the like because nobody 'gets paid' on Twitter or Facebook and that is why people don't seem to "care" as much.
I am fairly certain from what you have described, that Cassie is simply a naive teen who needs to be given guidance in what she is doing to bring her back on track (but it is still acknowledged in your story that she must be brought on track and helped to understand that plagiarism is wrong, just in a more gentle manner). When an established Hiver, however, knowingly publishes content without being transparent as to the source, and without doing the due diligence required of every Hiver to ensure that they are meeting community standards, values, and rules, then unfortunately they lay open to this sort of response and ultimately have nobody to blame but themselves for the fallout. This is not to say that other Hivers shouldn't approach the issue with sensitivity and kindness at first, asking for clarification, explanation, and assurances on future conduct, but everyone is different and some may feel that whilst they would give this latitude to a complete newbie, they are not prepared to extend it to someone who, as in today's case on Hive, that they perceive as already earning significant amounts of Hive on their posts, from what is claimed to be as a result of belonging to voting circles, for unoriginal content that has been plagiarised from others and copy-pasted into a Hive post. Regardless of knowledge or intention on the part of the owner of the Hive account, if the content of a specific post is plagiarised, it should be DV'ed. This use of the DV promotes the right values going forwards.
Allow me to use an example: If someone steals a car because they were deprived as a youngster and their parents taught them that stealing was ok, and then they get caught, we can argue that they are young, naive, influenced by the way in which they were raised, and we'd look to rehabilitate them and offer support as the first measure for a first violation, but we wouldn't let them keep the car, would we? Clearly that would be promoting the wrong behaviours and would deprive the genuine owner who worked hard to earn the car, of their right to the asset. Other Hivers (including whales) can't DV the original author, as they are hiding in the shadows, so all they can do is DV the content that is presented to them as being by the owner of the account and which has been identified as plagiarism. The owner of the account cannot then attempt to pass the buck and hide behind his/her co-creators, claiming ignorance, as it is not the actual creator's name against the piece, but the owner of the Hive account instead. I also don't think it helps when a person is challenged on their behaviours and chooses silence instead. Actions do however speak louder than words so when a person apologises for these behaviours, this is not necessarily sufficient in itself, they need to then demonstrate a change in their behaviour in order to rebuild the trust that has been lost. As I have said previously, complete transparency and due diligence are what is required.
Let me be clear though, I don't approve at all of witch-hunts, as this is not a resolution-seeking approach, and so a flippant comment by a whale to DV everything that is being published by said errant author is not an answer in itself. I do, however, understand the response, because how do they trust the content being output going forwards? Do we require the whales who DV to spend their time reviewing each and every post of said account to check for suspected plagiarism? Surely the onus has to rest with the errant account holder to prove a change in process?
Perhaps what needs to happen, at the very least, to reassure their audience of their honourable intentions, is that in today's case, the errant account holder, who in fairness has held up their hands, should have a disclaimer at the top of each post explaining that the posts under the account are written by a variety of authors and that each submission has been plagiarism checked before publication, with a copy of the plagiarism-free proof posted at the bottom of each post. This would give some reassurance at least to the community that the process is transparent, the curators know what they are getting, they can see it isn't plagiarised (in so far as exact use of words is concerned) and they can then choose to upvote or ignore instead of having a need to DV. This is the sort of response that should be given to errant account holders to gain back trust in the community, and probably what I should have offered up earlier today as my own personal advice on the posts that I saw re the DV'ing etc. Sadly, I don't think it helped that the post in contention today had at least one supporter intent on winding up the DV'ers with f-bombs and the like. That kind of language and tone certainly didn't help anyone. And so I think when they were appropriately engaged by @wil.metcalfe, he was unfortunately met with more than a little resistance and a complete shutdown to be honest, which in itself was not the most helpful or respectful response to Wil, who was just trying to help them to understand a different perspective.
Finally, as a parting note, I just want to be clear that I do not use the DV at all and was not involved in DV'ing this person or getting them DV'ed. I simply commented on the post after being tagged in it. I also tried to comment as objectively as possible, not knowing the full extent of what had gone on but just commenting on the scenario presented. Ordinarily, if I have concerns about anything, I will flag it to one or more of the Hivers whom I respect on the platform who have a lot more experience than me and whom I trust to take an objective, compassionate, and balanced view on things and make the right decision for the community as a whole.
I do hope that the community can come together better in the future to resolve issues rather than deteriorating into a mud-slinging pit of awkward discomfort. I personally found the regression today quite difficult and uncomfortable to witness. But I also found the issue of plagiarism and lack of transparency a problem. I could have walked away and chosen to ignore it altogether, a sort of "not my monkeys, not my circus" approach, but I felt this would be disrespectful to the person who had looked to me, amongst others, for input and I felt that although it wasn't my monkeys or circus, it was about my "home" on the blockchain, and as a stakeholder, I needed to stand up and be counted. I had initially decided to take the evening off from writing and curating, however, your post inspired me to write the above response.
Thank you Jay for your generous perspective and sharing of your knowledge and experience. It is always very much appreciated. Using your own language (if I may be so bold and not be accused of trademark or copyright infringement or plagiarism by the peanut gallery lol🤣) let's hope as Hivers, we can all follow your lead and Ryze above this🙏
@wil.metcalfe I hope the above is a more meaningful comment than the one I left earlier during my working day 🙏