RE: 50 STEEM bounty for explaing basic Steem stuff to @the-resistance.
All your points are true... and yet have nothing to do with what I am upset about.
And that is the fact that we all stand by and argue about this or that side of this issue in terms of the voting and bidbots...
When the real issue, is that a playground full of people has just has one big fat kid step into it from out of nowhere and start imposing his opinion as law in a place where in fact, his opinion is nothing more than his own and had nothing to do with any kind of enforceable anything. It's just an asshole bully with an opinion, and a bigger gun than the people he assaults with his terrorism.
You know, like the mafia does when they sell "protections" to shop owners to ensure they don't have "accidents" by failing to comply with the mafia boss.
"Capiche'?"
OK. So who is it up to then? A lot of people seem to think what he is doing is right. Is it up to those people? Whose opinion actually matters? If not his, then whose? Yours? If you had the big guns, and you could do whatever you wanted with them, what would you do in his place? Would you allow the bid-bot profiteers to run off the noobs and pilfer the kittens?
Look up the non agression principle, if it unfamiliar to you, but I suspect it isn't...
This is a decentralized platform, with no rulers. It has rules, but those are the code, nothing more, nothing less. In theory, no one here is breaking the rules of the code. Neither the asscat or the people using or making bots. So what gives asscat the right to assault other users with his opinion, especially when it's not even his real opinion as demonstrated by his own $1000.00 a day self-voting habits - not illegal but sure as hell hypocritical given his "reasons" for his assaults.
If I had the bigger guns, I'd shoot cans in my backyard with them. Because what other people do is none of my business until they do it on my property, then I have the right to return fire in self defense.
He is offensive, in all senses of the word, and far outside the ideals of our white paper and our code law here. He is a tyrannical, hypocritical and somewhat sociopathic bully. Even inconsistent in his targeting by his own guidelines.
End of the day, he's an aggressor, a terrorist and a stain on the face of this platform that is acting against even his OWN self interests. But that too is none of my business, once again, till he comes in MY yard - meaning my discord communities which are NOT decentralized, they are my private domain, and my posts and my friends posts who ask me to defend them or need help doing so themselves.
Aggressors will not be tolerated. A flagging is not aggression. Wanton destruction is though, and this thing has done plenty of that.
As for the last sentence of your thing? People don't have a gun to their heads to use bid bots. That's a consensual arrangement between buyer and seller in a free market, even if the bot owners profit and the buyer loses money, as most do. This is none of your business or mine.
But the reward pool rape!!! OMG!!! Ok, so either play to win and bot up since thats the thing people do here, or don't play. Your choice, as consumer of the goods.
But when an aggressor comes and tries to impose law of his whim by force? That's terrorism, violates the NAP and is worthy of my contempt and active attempts to defensively end it.
Supporting GC is supporting terrorism,plain and simple. And I am fully aware we are dialoging and you have not expressed support for either side in your question, so don't read this any other way than as an explanatory response, not a personally accusatory one of any kind.
Hey @sircork, I have not been able to steem today. But I actually really liked your response. So I wanna respond to it. Hopefully tomorrow (which is in 12 minutes for me...but I'm going to bed now. Super long day.) I'm interested in this conversation. If others are getting annoyed, we can get a room, but it seems to pertain, so.....
I will look forward to it.
Exactly correct @SirCork.
Is Grumpy Cat imposing law? No. Even if the cat says they are laws, they are not. The cat may be wrong to downvote if the cat is downvoting, but that is what freedom is all about. Cat is imposing opinions and is doing whatever. If we don't like it. We got to downvote Cat or ignore Cat or something. That is our job. We can talk about it and we can take action if we want as that is our freedom to react to Cat and others too. Good luck with that.
I think that's what is referred to as free market. The market dictates the industry. Right now, there is a market for downvoting and getting rid of spammers and the vehicles they use to proliferate (aka: bots over 3.5 days old). I think you have a good point here as well.
Thank you.
OK. So I like this response. It sounds authentic and driven by experience and personal reason. That being said, I think part of the problem is the code itself. Curation coding has morphed over the stretch of the beta so many times, it's frustrating to see that during a time where more tweaking is needed, none is made. Only a little tweaking could engender a more mindful and authentic voting structure.
What we're left with, as a result, are Big Brothers and large farm animals like the cat, who mean well to begin with, but who, not surprisingly, fall into some categories of hypocrisy, as well as indiscriminately alter the experience other users have, for the worse.
That being said, I'm still not altogether convinced his actions are wrong. I am saying I'd need to see the numbers. If his downvoting is in fact generating an appropriate deterrent for abusers, thereby creating a more even playing field for good users, I'd like to see it. That questions needs to be answered.
Also, you have not answered my question as to what you would do with your steem power if you were in his place....what is your proposal for dealing with abuse on here...or do you not consider it such???
I totally answered all of that?
You're saying you'd do nothing?
OK. Fine. I'll give you that. It's none of your business to meddle unless it's on your property. Is that your whole take? Anarchy 101?
I think that philosophy is all well and good until a bully comes to town with bigger guns. Leaving a bully to suit himself is one thing. But letting him take advantage of others, even though it's not in my yard, is entirely another. And when these people are members of the community that I share?
I'd say I have a right to protect them as well. And if I have a bigger gun, then I'd call myself @grumpycat and scare the bullies off. How does that make me a bully? The only part where his argument fails is the fact he votes himself up so much. I'm not sure that's much different than a pilfering 11th hour bot-vote. But just because he is doing something hypocritical does not mean his downvoting is also hypocritical.
To which I reiterate...
till he comes in MY yard - meaning my discord communities which are NOT decentralized, they are my private domain, and my posts and my friends posts who ask me to defend them or need help doing so themselves.
But then, we need bigger guns or we get beat down by a bully. A bully I have yelled and ridiculed and told to get "off our lawn" plenty... but welcome to the experiment in ancapistan... which is proving warlords can only be defeated by community action, and here, the community is not strong enough, to beat up the bully. So we go round and round.
I still contend he needs to read his own headline and learn economics though, as he is the one raping the pool the most consistently with his self voting and exposing him for the fraud he is means all of the community will reject him.
The bot owners bending over for him irritates me too even if I didn't believe in bots, I believe in having a damn spine and some integrity.
It's a losing situation for the cat though, as he is the one ruining the platform for himself, losing money in his wallet from when he bought in, till now, and without community wide outrage at his terrorism and hypocrisy, basically, he wins in the short term, but kills the whole place in the long term. Because in turn the community is effectively saying, bullies are cool. No biggie. And down we all fall.
Doesn't this just imply anarchy only works when everyone is an anarchist?