During my Steemit routine this morning, I came came across a most interesting article titled:
PROPOSAL - How to DEFINE and FIGHT the BAD - Create a COMMITTEE with STRONG ARM to Support Creation of a GREAT STEEMIT CULTURE | Author @edje.
OK! This one caught my eye 👁.
So, I read this PROPOSAL...
...with its interesting and valid observations. What is happening on Steemit just now? How has it evolved - or perhaps devolved? Scary stuff, if you ask me...
I mean Edje's idea of fixing it. Nothing against Edje - I believe the article was penned with good intentions. But,
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. 🔥
Feeling suddenly absorbed by the issue, I replied...
...and a couple of hours later, I was the recipient of quite an extensive answer.
Nothing wrong with that. I love it when we engage. The length of his answer was discouraging at first. Doubling down on his view, making his points...trying to take mine apart...
...one by one. Giving no quarters! So...
I let it sit - 🤔 thinking: "But Edje! I thought I had made my case..."
Apparently not! But I am not one to back down. And in a moment of intuition and motivation, I responded...
... Marathon style... 🏃
However!
..after reviewing it, I remembered my article on How to Multiply your Comment Rewards... and I submitted my counter as a root post instead.
You're reading it now. 😎
I hope that this discussion is picked up by many, and I would love to hear especially from those who have been on Steemit from the early days and have seen it change - often to their dismay.
Edje's solution to correcting bad behavior is brute force. His quick fix: Strong Arm. Under the veil of 'democracy', of course. You know, committees, votes, enforcement, power. Remember...?
Moscow 1917-91? Central Committee. Politburo. This then, the proposed solution...?
... I can not agree with.
Don't be against something - Be for something
I am all for fighting the bad and badness. I hate it when people milk the system and take advantage of others and abuse our good nature.
I love to be part of a society that is based on value creation. But my philosophy is based upon positive re-inforcement - not asserting negative force, unless, of course, the safety of body or property is at stake. Other than that - live by example. Live better!
I'll be short and to the point. I know you don't have all day. But let's think about this:
No. 1 Centralized Control
My Argument:
Steemit is decentralized. A centralized governance goes against what most Steemians are aiming for.
His Counter: Steemit is an Inc, thus their rules are already centrally controlled, codified.
Lets see...
The Steemit creators have built rules 📐 into the platform... And yes, it is a for profit corporation that owns it. And the owners make the rules.
However... No one forces any user to participate. Block chain technology has a creator. The creator makes the rules. In an open environment, freedom invites unsavory characters - just as in real life.
Will additional rules be necessary based on need?
Not unless new functionality is introduced... Right? Have the smart people at Steemit not looked carefully at these other social networks? Have they not embraced a different model than the main stream platforms that bully their users into submission by censorship?
Behave, or WE demonetize your content! What constitutes 'bad' behavior anyway? Who is to decide to punish for what, and how severely? The Politburo? The Committee? Were not even the Soviets required to vote ☑ - on paper? Do we want to learn learn from history?
Have the creators of Steemit... have they not given us a grand opportunity to self-govern? To create value, for which we are compensated, based on how well that value is perceived by other Steemians?
No. 2 Voting - The Central Committee
Voting on rules, not sure I agree either. Two wolves 🐺 🐑 🐺 and one sheep vote on what's for dinner...
Mob rule corrupts. Who would be there to prevent vote buying? The ones that are on the ballot? Hmmm...
Is extortion a possibility? If you don't vote for this rule - I will down-vote you and your followers... into oblivion❣
This might be an extreme example. But is this not what is happening in these democracies the west over. Congress, Parliament, Lobbyists, Special Interests, Committees... Who controls the rulers? Who watches the watchers?
The More Rules Exist - The More Rules Will Be Broken!
Wouldn't you agree:...? Common sense rules are far more difficult to corrupt - though that's not impossible.
No. 3 Self-Voting
Edje wold like to prohibit that. He compares the existence of self voters to Mafia Takeover. Really?
My answer is simple:
No Stress...
It's voluntary, remember? No one can force me to read your stuff, vote for it, or comment on it.
If people don't like the voting habit of some - or the content they post, why not move on? In extreme cases: Go ahead: Mute'em. I have seen some powerful people up-voting their own comments - for the buck of it. Will I engage with them? That's everyone's own decision. No?
Why would we be bothered who up-votes what? Is it any of my business? It is their SteemPower. They didn't take it from your account. It is their life.
💰
Is it for me to tell someone else what to do, as long as they do not inflict harm on us? Is it not true.... ? If the people on Steemit ostracize leeches and spammers, non value creators by refusing to engage with them, will those not soon find Steemit to be a lonely place...?
As long as we feed trolls, they'll thrive...
As far as draining the reward pool goes, I think public naming of those who do is effective. No force. Just knowledge.
I don't see a Mafia anywhere, my friend. I predict that introducing a Central Committee certaintly would - you know, that all mighty Politburo.
Tell me that my values are bad. Your ideology is morally superior! YOUR opinion counts. I have Sheep for dinner. The two wolves can't help but agree...
No. 3 Flagging - Down-Voting
Anon flagging, as proposed by Edje, for me? I's a no go!
The emphasis has to be on accountability.
🏁
Down-voted by a mob of political adversaries because they don't agree with my position?
Let me ask you: What could be worse than not being able to face your accuser? If someone down-votes, there maybe redress... or even recourse.
If Steemians are not willing to put their account name to a down-vote, then there is no down-vote. Just imagine a mob of politically motivated account holders creating havoc on certain users for...
...whatever reason. Accountability is key ...in a reasonable society.
No. 4 Anarchy is a Good Thing
Edje states, that Anarchy is total chaos. No rules. His argument is based on that assumption. The assumption is wrong. It is the result of the hijacking the term by those who love big government.
Anarchy and no rules...
Edje? That's is a misnomer. Anarchy does not mean the absence of rule. Just the opposite. It's the voluntary adherence to rules in the absence of centralized force. Let me rephrase:
Anarchy is the absence of centralized enforcement of rules.
Each person in the community takes responsibility for their own action - if someone breaks the easy to understand rules, they will be treated by the community accordingly. No libraries full of law books in Legalease, the entrapment language.
Here is how Anarchy would work in the real world:
Simple animation and explanation of anarchy by Evelyn Kennedy
No. 5 The Solution
Last but not least: The Solution: The quick fix you asked for...
You wrote:
The nature of humans is to think of its own before thinking of others.
True for some, not for all. Human morality is corrupted. Men are fallen creatures. A sad state of affairs, indeed. But not hopeless. Not irredeemable.
Remember? The Creator Makes The Rules.
Human behavior is governed by code, the code or philosophy someone subscribes to.
I happen to be a Bible believing Christian. I am not perfect by any stretch of imagination.
However, if we were just to try to be the best people we can be, and if we were to love our neighbors as ourselves, if we were committed to refrain from stealing, if everyone was focussed on value creation - and if we loved our Creator - Jesus - more than ourselves, the world, including Steemit, would be a better place.
Now there is an idea for a quick fix.
-ch @globocop
ch @globocop