RE: Downvotes aren't so bad

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Downvotes aren't so bad

View the full context

niallon11 in Synergy Builders • last month

I don't like them but they are not the end of the world if you get a downvote. It happens in life and should be treated as a small problem.

Where the problem lies for me is in the zeroing of rewards by bigger accounts due to their large stake. If they disagree with a post then downvoting a few percent of a post would show they don't agree. Using their huge stake to wipe away the rewards from a smaller account is akin to bullying in my opinion.

I remember being targeted by Haejin back in the day for weeks as a minnow account. I think that i downvoted his account for 2c on a $50 post and then he spent weeks zeroing every post that i made. It was enough to drive away a lot of users but I managed to stick it out and stay active.

It's the same now with hivewatchers, blocktrades and some of the other og accounts that go out and nuke smaller accounts and drive them away.

A small downvote shows dissatisfaction, nuking accounts kills the chain. We have lost so many users over how posts are rewarded that we have killed the value of the token. If the large stakeholders had refrained from downvoting small accounts we could have 5-10x the amount of users here right now and a thriving economy.

It's short sighted and still happening.

last month in Synergy Builders by niallon11

0.00 ARCHON

13 votes

Sort:

Trending

[-]

eddiespino last month

It's a complicated topic, but it's true. I actually mentioned that in my post about downvotes. This type of downvotes or zero lists can prevent users, whether good or bad, from receiving a few dollars or even cents, but it has caused those users to sell thousands of dollars worth of HIVE, and if they were considering buying in the future, they will never do it now.

And sure, there are users that spam, scam, and don't bring any value at all, and they well deserve to be on those lists. Who determines that? That is why it can be complicated. Some users have committed abuse, either by mistake or on purpose, and many times, they are put on those lists without a second chance, and many times, they give up. It's very hard to onboard a user, and very easy to scare him away.

0.00 ARCHON

6 votes

[-]

eddiespino last month

Just found this, it seems that Haejin had a very weak character:

https://x.com/AlexHormozi/status/1963292201913303454

0.00 ARCHON

1 vote

[-]

web3creative last month

Love the quote! Alex Hormozi is an incredible, resilient and hard working individual. I follow all his stuff.

Keep building, sir.

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

justmythoughts last month

I have been told by Hivewatchers that I was milking the platform which is kind of funny as I was hardly making a $100 monthly while they get a bunch of funds from DHF.
As I have seen lately some prominent users have started talking about this Downvote abuse now it's the time to have a community to represent those who are victims of this and support them.
@eddiespino

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

eddiespino last month (edited)

I hope I can explain this objectively.

The anti-abuse work is important, and they do prevent and find a lot of serious abuse that happens on Hive. But it is also true that they mostly have a very bad attitude and toxic behaviour, they prefer to punish users rather than educate them, and they have indeed driven away a lot of people, maybe some of them deserved it, maybe some of them could have stayed and actually brought value to Hive. Still, too late to know now, they are long gone. Or maybe they are not gone, but still here using alt accounts.

And they do get a lot of funds from the DHF, and like other projects on Hive, it is simply not justified, at least in my view.

Sorry, I think that this was rather subjective.

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

justmythoughts last month

This fund should have been used for marketing purposes, users' incentivization and other stuff.

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

eddiespino last month

True.

The problem is that so far, nobody has found the right formula to promote Hive.

We have a rally car that has cost hundreds of thousands of HIVE and has no tangible results.

A documentary that very few people have watched.

We have a sports team in Venezuela doing very expensive events, which, yes, has onboarded some users, but it has not brought real value or results to Hive.

Events where we meet a lot of people, but it's hard to share the vision of Hive, as it is something very hard to understand and explain fully. A lot of new people can join, but not many are going to be truly interested and become active members.

I could continue.

And I know that it's not easy, many of the marketing efforts have been made during a very harsh bear market, which hasn't helped to see good results in terms of price or user activity.

On top of this, everyone has a different vision of Hive and different opinions, and as we don't have a central authority, we have yet to define a clear and unified message.

0.00 ARCHON

2 votes

[-]

justmythoughts last month (edited)

Well, I believe that money may have been spent on guest posts, airdrops and other online stuff for advertisement.

0.00 ARCHON

1 vote

[-]

eddiespino last month

Some of those things have been tested already.

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

justmythoughts last month

But we should keep trying again and again.

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

justmythoughts last month

Why is it that some new projects garner good attention through online campaigns? Can't we do this?

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

eddiespino last month

Maybe we could, but it depends on a lot of factors. With some projects, we only see the tip of the iceberg and not everything that is below.

0.00 ARCHON

Show 2 more replies

[-]

alohaed last month

I often wonder if we are talking about things or features that matter to people.

Crypto has negative connotations with some audiences, and they may not make the distinction between tokens and blockchain.

Some of the abstract ideas that we may value, may not be immediately cognizable to potential users of Hive.

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

eddiespino last month

That's true.

For us, it could be a no-brainer, because we already know the advantages firsthand, but for others, it could be either hard to understand or not attractive at all.

For example, the censorship-resistant feature might only attract a certain type of user, while many others might not care about it.

And the most attractive thing on Hive, which is the monetization, is really hard to promote because in certain countries it might even be illegal to make such claims. On top of that, if people join with that "promise" and see that it's not as easy as they thought, they will not stay active and will even call it a scam.

0.00 ARCHON

1 vote

[-]

justmythoughts last month

But unfortunately they look to be part of the status quo. If this sort of attitude continues maybe we may have a fork of Hive as well.

0.00 ARCHON

[-]

eddiespino last month

The blockchain is an open-source technology. In theory, anyone with the right knowledge could make a fork.

The hard part is to earn the trust not only of users or the community, but of applications, exchanges, and more. As I mentioned in the post, a lot of factors have to be present for a project like this to be successful.

Look at blurt, they forked from Steem and removed the downvotes as well as other things, but they have not yet grown enough. They are only in one exchange, and the value of the coin is very low in comparison.

Maybe we would get to a point where the fork is inevitable, maybe we can fix most of the problems we have, or maybe we won't be able to do either of them. Time will tell.