POB, some questions and concerns
This text is quite large, I could break it down into smaller ones, but it will take me time and space on the platform to do that, so I won't (unless the character limit is exceeded).
I will post a Portuguese version (if I can…) with 60% POB-fund. This version is 30% POB-fund.
This post is participating in the POB - WOTW contest, and the word I choose is “Questions”
POB, some questions and concerns
I've been observing some things here at POB for a few weeks now and having doubts.
With all that happened in the last two weeks, some doubts (and concerns) have strengthened, and I would like to expose them publicly, because I saw some things on several fronts and on the Discord server that make me believe that the doubts (and concerns) that I have are not mine alone.
Most of the issues are interconnected, and I want to make certain points clear, so some parts will be repetitive.
When I talk about platform representation, I'll be talking about @proofofbrainio and whoever else is in control of the platform, the rules and biggest actions so far, and nothing that I'm going to say towards the platform representation is personal, it's just comments with the goal of understanding and clarifying things better. If anyone wants to take it personally, it will be a sad thing.
I know this post can (and probably will) harm me, or benefit me, I would say that it's not exactly my intention in either case, what my real intention is to know what I need to know, to follow my instincts that say that I must keep testing the waters before diving any further, and say things that many people are afraid of.
If that means pushing more people away, ok, I just hope that this text doesn't harm those who support me here (if they want to get away, ok too).
I have been following the conversations on discord and several posts.
Maybe I don't have seen everything, but everything I've seen still hasn't answered some things.
Let's go to the questions:
Okay, this question arose because I have seen many posts being routinely voted on with big votes, posts that are unformatted, unsourced, disrespectful, ranting, with dubious morality, with several attacks on everything and everyone, with no concrete empirical basis, no usable content , with a radical ideological bias, bordering on apology for physical crimes against human beings, with prejudice, racism, etc., and this being posted by a few profiles, profiles that even displease many people.
All this while having many other posts from various profiles receiving few votes with expressive power, I'm talking about posts with well-structured content, with sources and original content, purposeful, respectful, constructive, positive, etc.
In addition, I also saw many people being questioned aggressively and accusingly, for performing certain actions. Actions that other people also perform without problems, including receiving incentives from representatives of the platform.
You see, I don't want to decide or define who people and profiles vote for or should vote for, my question is about double standards, goals and directions.
How to handle content outside the rules?
Well, I've already talked about out-of-the-rules content, and as content that doesn't follow the rules is well voted. Well, if that happens, if even with a good part of the community expressing displeasure when asked, if comments and dialogues don't solve it, what to do?
Downvote? Complain without being heard? Cry? Leave the platform? Keep it quiet?
Themes and who posts are more important than content, form and intent?
I believe that with the exception of themes that induce aggressive crimes, such as those that directly attack human dignity (children or adults) or cause unnecessary suffering to animals, that conspire against the stability of a nation or people, and some more sinister areas, none theme or approach should be banned, and everything deserves a vote.
But I get confused when I see posts without original or useful content, or worse, with harmful content (aggressive, dissociated from physical reality, etc.) getting votes because they address a certain topic or was posted by x person. And that makes me more confused when it's constant.
It makes me wonder if I'm in POB (Proof of Brain), or POB (Proof of Believe) where people vote for what they believe, even if there is no quality or POL (proof of liking) where they vote for themes and people they like and fuck quality and construtive purpose, or anything like that.
If it was just formatting, come on, it wouldn't confuse me so much (although I've seen this subject justify certain votes when it's convenient) I believe that formatting can be relevant, but the content, the originality, the intention is more.
I'm talking about something that really proves that the writer has a brain that is capable of going beyond taking an easy topic and copying and pasting, or going beyond attacking anyone (even those who agree with it), I'm talking about something that really builds a better community, not just hate, war, disgust, etc.
What makes me more confused is that all of this happens while I see a lot of good posts being left out (yes, I'll hit that key again, because it's about choices).
All this gives me a feeling of dejavú…
Right/Freedom of expression and action for whom?
I have participated in decentralized networks since 2017, I have never downvoted, nor do I intend to.
I've always had and have access to low quality content, fraud, aggressive content and generalist offensive that have tested and test this purpose, however I understand that when downvote enters the stage, things tend to end with the weaker side (usually me) being crushed by the stronger side (who made the post or supporters), so I avoid the downvote. I believe many people have found themselves in the same situation.
I believe in dialogue, but what I've seen over time in other networks and now in POB, is some attempts at dialogue leading to disrespect (including generalist), verbal aggression (including generalist), threats of physical aggression, even, and all that with strong support(great votes).
I have also seen some posts that have no rationale at all, but because they address certain topics, they are strongly supported (great votes).
And I repeat that I've seen it and I'm tired of seeing it, it's heartbreaking, posts and people looking to build something positive, being left out (if they don't have big stakes).
So what we have is big players supporting only one side and giving big votes on posts and comments with content without soul or depth, which doesn't bring anything really positive to the platform, while ignoring positive and quality content.
Speaking of random individuals, it’s ok, people do whatever they want to do, but it gets complicated when people representing a platform take sides (goes to Ned, to Dan, to JS, etc, etc).
This demonstrates to outsiders that there are privileges, that one expression or a way of acting is more relevant than another, that one content source is more relevant than another, that one topic is more relevant than others, even if in general the content is weak. This indicate that in reality what is in charge is who has great decision-making power (generally creators and first users), in other words, centralism.
When rules only apply to one side, when people can sell their POB's and calmly express that they are on the platform just for business, receiving strong support and nothing happens while others are attacked several times, losing support, it is clear that we have no right to express themselves and act for everyone.
When a side that in almost everything it does has been bringing bad things to the platform (and everything indicates that it will continue to do so), it is continually supported, while the other side struggles to establish itself, including having supporters being affected by everything that has happened, we do not have the right to express and act for everyone.
When questions and positions only receive real attention and support when they come from one side and not the other, we don't have the right to express and act for everyone.
When one of the sides does not follow the rules, is not propositional, is not conciliatory and aggregating, and has a growing power of influence that cannot be affected, we do not have the right to express and act for everyone.
When one side is privileged, when a profile(or many) are supported and favored by the platform representation disregarding any opinion, and the only tool someone finds to resolve this is the downvote, but tool is blocked because affected this profile supported and favored, while others not so supported profiles receive downvote by default and without limits (convincing other people to failing to vote for someone, or failing to support someone who posts good content, to side with someone who doesn't post good content, is also a type of downvote, and it's something that has happened a lot in the last few days...), we do not have the right to express and act for everyone.
I could extend myself, but I believe I made my point.
What to do when all this happens? Leave the platform? Stop posting?
What is the real purpose of POB? What are the short, medium and long term intentions? Is POB a business? If it's a business, what are the visions for it? What do these visions consider a priority?
This question is a little broader.
Knowing the purpose of something is important. Mainly something that could become a business. This is true for founders, for potential investors, for users. When this is well defined, it is possible to decide which people you want to reach. Now if it's not a business, if it's a personal project, that's another point.
As I said above, and I will repeat it again and again, I don't want to decide or define who people and profiles vote for, but I do question about double standards, and goals.
I say this because it is worrying to note that whoever is running the project, focuses on what I have already written above, gives strength to unproductive and harmful profiles, themes and content, in demerit of profiles and propositional and constructive content. It's worrying because in the long run, because of the DPOS concept, it means that some views, aggressive, unproductive views, which believe themselves to be unique, which are believed to be better, tend to prevail on the platform, tend to have more tokens, tend to have more strength.
And that's evident by now, just look at the mechanics of the platform. When most of the highly rated posts belong to a post type, or a specific type of content creator, it means that the top of the tags will be dominated by those posts, if anyone wants to find something different they will have to dive into the tags, go beyond 20 or 30 posts, and not everyone has time for that.
Another obvious thing is that large votes going to controversial posts, continually, means that posts with different content than the supported content will not be getting as many rewards, after all, there is a limit of POB's being issued and this limit only tends to get stricter. That is, more concentration of power.
I believe that I don't even need to talk about the problem that is big votes being put into play to counteract the reactions of people who are angry with what has happened (they don't go away, and there tends to come more).
Who will want to invest or maintain investment in something where only one way of thinking is strongly supported, where compliance prevails and another opinion is rooted out? Who will want to directly or indirectly strengthen a representation and a platform that does this?
How people, whether content producers, investors, collaborators, are going to defend a project like this? How can they not want to continually dispense tokens, not knowing who they're selling to?
It is necessary to consider that all this can and has brought indignation and opposition to the project internally and externally. So far we've seen profiles acting out in the open, expressing their intentions, but what about when certain profiles become anonymous? And when certain movements start to be automated? When bots start to act to manipulate the value, to downvote everyone, to create dissent strategies?
Who will want to stay in a place like this? Who will be able to?
What we have seen is that bad content, content that only follows a worldview, and continued strong support for that content, including through the platform representation, tends to limit the future of POB, tends to alienate people and tends to attract people who just want to see the world burn and have lots of matches, firewood, gasoline and everything else to make it happen.
If POB doesn't want to be a business, or doesn't want to be a business that intends to build plurality, if it wants to be a business that intends to build an environment without variety, where some curse, attack, post anything without limits and receiving huge support, everything I said is irrelevant, I would say that it is possible to profit a lot even with a limited audience. But if the vision is different, if the purpose is different, something needs to be changed...
Like how? It's not up to me to define it myself. It is not my purpose to say: Stop voting for John Doe, stop giving POB's to Jane Doe. Or things like that.
I want to share some observations and I want to know what will be done.
Because really, it's all about choices.
How to find balance and solutions?
I'll finally talk directly about a possible solution:
Rules and Systems!!
Yes. It's obvious.
But I add:
That work for everyone, maybe with temporary exceptions in relation to newcomers, or non-reincident people, or they just don't work for everyone (and then it's everyone for themselves and God, Shiva, Yahweh, Allah, Ogum, Odin, Bast, anyway, any deities that you who are reading believe, against everyone).
I could even say that the main rule would be to have no rules, but…
And let it be obvious that the continuation of double standards, and worse, openly, will not improve the situation.
It's all about choices
What are my other ideas?
There are other ideas, let's see how this post will be received… I don't want to invest my time where it might not be wanted, or worst, atacked…
Am I pulling the benefit to my side (yes, I questioned myself and continually question this)?
No. If my posts are not worthy of votes, I understand not to receive votes. Accountability.
I'm talking about other people.
I would even say that there are posts much more structured than mine that receive fewer votes than me, and I have to say, that I’m not receiving great votes (I have to say thanks to those who have voted in me until now).
And if certain people want to attack me inside the platform, if they don't want to vote for me, decide to convince other people not to vote for me, decide to downvote me, mutate me, and even call me midwit, commie, liberal, libertarian, conservative, depraved, capitalist, chauvinist, machinist, etc, ok, not offending my honor or my physical integrity, nor mine people, so far, so good...
What is the future of POB?
Could I say that POB is over, that it is gone, that not even a reboot would solve it? Yes, I could. Was it right? No. So I’m not talking this.
Because I don't know what the real future is. It's not for me to decide alone.
But I know that there are many destinations, positive and negative, easy and hard (not necessarily something negative or positive), open or limited, etc, etc.
I see some in my brain and I'll see the real one...
What do I think about POB?
I believe in the project, it helped me and I saw that many people were helped. I would dare say that I have and have been put the skin in the game (and no, that doesn't make me a midwit or anything else in that sense), this post is a part of that.
I made it a point to stake my rewards until the end of the next month and look for jobs in the “real world”, so I don't need to take POB's off the platform. Things are moving relatively in this direction,
I have several ideas that might be interesting. I want to invest time here(for me my time is more valuable than money)...
But I also have doubts, and I see that if things continue as they are, there is no room for me here, not as I would like, nor for many other people I know, nor for people who are not happy with what is happening.
And I think that it will not be questions that will bring down the project, but the answers given and the choices made...
I think that I’ve already said, that it's all a matter of choice...
These are some of the questions that have been on my mind or brain in the last few days, even in the middle of the process I'm going through (selection for a course).
For many I'm a sardine, a krill maybe, and just a Latin American guy.
I know my actions so far are a fart of a tardigrade at the general scheme of things and the universe. And I know that despite not knowing everything, I do know some things...
I know I'm not the only one thinking the way I think…
I know that if sardines and krills decide to change seas, sharks and whales will go hungry, and bloodthirsty and hungry sharks have no family and no friends...
I’m open for questions about this post, but I don’t intend to answer things that I already talked in the post. .
Let's see what happens.
It's all a matter of choice.
If you liked this post, give it a share, an upvote, or make a comment! If you have any criticisms or positive suggestions, comment too!!
Si te gustó esta publicación, dale un voto positivo, haz un comentario, ¡comparte! Si tienes alguna crítica o sugerencia positiva, ¡comenta también!!
Se você gostou desse post, dê um upvote, faça um comentário, compartilhe! Se tiver alguma crítica ou sugestão positiva, comente também!!