I find it interesting how many folks are against private property rights. I'm not going to rewrite the many thousands of words I've already written on this. But will sum it up with what others do with their private stake is no one elses business. Unless you believe that you have some right to how others are choosing to use that stake. I do find it hypoctirical when folks are against the VTS but upvote their own posts 100%. The only difference is one probably gets more of the cut after the self vote.
No one ran anyone off. After months of being pushed and insulted megadrive finally hit back. His hitting back consisting of saying those who were pushing others to use a badge stating they didn't use VTS or be shunned wouldn't get an airdrop from his upcoming project. This was further (and in my opinion not a good shot, but then I wasn't the one being hit at for months) exacerbated when it was pointed out that the circle pushing the non VTS or else scenario heavily voted for one another with much of their shares, as well as some heavily self voting.
No one was forced out. They all could have stayed, all kept their non VTS banners and said fuck the airdrop, which they did without staying. Do I wish they would have stayed, I sure do and not because of the token value which has largely recovered. I wish they would have stayed because outside of the drama of trying to tell others how to use their property overall they were good for Blurt. I miss one very much as we had grown to be friends.
Your comment regarding skin color is not a good look from where I sit, and is unfounded as some other charges I've seen you make elsewhere with others.
I would also point out that megadrive did do something regarding upvu, he stood firm in the face of coercion and verbal attacks as several large whales tried to force this chain to allow others to dictate how one uses their private property. I commend him in not buckling. He tried his best to ignore them, even after they tried forcing a vote that failed. He ignored them for some time with many insults. Then he finally had enough and let them know that there would be no airdrop. I probably would have made that decision with the ones calling me out of name the first time I was called out of name.
I'm going to close out as I really didn't have time nor energy for this, but felt something needed saying.
If one is an advocate for property rights, then one doesn't get involved how others are using their property, whether it is VTS or self voting.
I can tell by your response that you’re a very insightful person. So far you’re the one who’s given the most accurate description of what happened with the gang that left Blurt a few weeks ago.
There was a lot more that went on behind the scenes that we didn’t make public for the sake of people’s dignity.
BTW, in the end, nobody was excluded from the airdrop. The snapshot has already been taken, and everyone who has attested will get their airdrop when the token launches.
Glad to hear this as I think it’s inportant, once ppl start getting excluded from airdrops because of personal grievances that’s rocky territory for a site that’s aiming to be somewhat decentralised.
What's behind the scenes ? Is it a blockchain community ? What airdrop? You mean steem vs blurt ? Or something else. Anyway, I'll be happy to know what's going on behind the scenes. Maybe there is a post you can refer to, or an account. Sometimes it is really hard to be aware of everything going on. I consider everyone has a word to say, no matter how much the stake he/she has. I'm still here at least and a lot are.
From @ultravioletmag...spot on.
I'm not against people's property rights not being exercised with-in a given system. While UPVU is up and running, by all mean I should probably use it too then, like why not? More money for me right? But I support changing the system. I see a difference maybe you don't.
The original steemit system was flawless with no delegation option. Once the distortions happened, the gaming of the system began. That is what upvu is, a gaming of an otherwise highly successful flawless economic model. The gaming of this system acts like a parasite on the whole, eventually it will take it over, just like we have seen on Steemit. If you and the platform in general are ok with that in the name of property rights, than I will certainly take that into consideration when timing a top to this market.
If you don't dislike me after writing this post, I'll makes some jokes and up-vote you on the next. I'm very well aware you are not a fan of my hard nose ways of pushing out an issue, but that's what makes me, me! And that is not gonna change for anything. Hope you are doing well with your new job and you can hold out for more than a month ;)
That is your right and I defend it if you so choose.
I don't dislike you at all, you are likable. I just disagree with many of your conclusions and presentations. :/
Many! Say it aint so! Hahaha
Honestly, I think Im a bit shell shocked from building up a blog and reputation on hive for almost 5 years, to have it destroyed the way they did.
Im gonna make an effort to chill and focus on having fun and not care so much about any of this stuff.
I think that the platfOrm can be altered tho to minimise abuse etc as long as it’s applied to everyone. Blurt does alrwady have aspects of its platform that mean certain precendent is set, changing that is the same. I don’t believe for example in directly targeting upvu but if this behaviour is causing issues that the majority of the users don’t like then there can be options like ‘no one can delegate to people with more stake than them’ type scenarios. I’ve not read enough into it to have a proper opinion but I think on a site like this it’s important to have discussions. That includes wtp having his opinion and then people agreeing or disagreeing. I guess ultimately there will be a consensus that makes final decisions and changes.
I'm not seeing any abuse. People are choosing to use their stake how they see fit. It's none of anyone's business if this involves delegating to another.
I believe there is room here for pure investors as well, and services such as VTS make the idea more appealing to them. I welcome investment.
I think how people use the site is everyone’s business as a community but the point is we decide how to make changes to the community as a community not 3 ppl picking ina. Few ppl for fun. It’s very different. To me anywyas. It’s also ok to choose how to vote, highlight things etc. Being free doesn’t mean no one has personal and group moral compasses, that might vary to others.
If you don't like what someone is doing with their speech, then there is a mute button. If you feel that we have the right to dictate to others how they use their stake the other chains already have that feature, it's called flagging/downvoting.
I prefer freedom of speech and property rights being protected myself.
Speech I agree but the site already has some rules and technical aspects so changing them based on collective (not stake based) consensus to me seems inevitable as something grows and isn’t rly different to having existing settings. Like for example the fact one can self upvote is the same in essence as there being no option to self upvote, I don’t mind a site having its own rules, I just don’t like it being able to pick off specific ppl for personal reasons. Having the option to self vote / not self upvote isn’t removing freedom of speech or ability to earn like everyone else IMO. It simply still gives everyone on the site the same / equal rights as one another.
When the failed idea of democracy takes root, money flees so as not to allow the masses of poor strip their often hard earned wealth from them by consensus.
To any pondering this logically, those tow positions are glaringly diametrically opposed. Telling another what they can or can't do with their property is limiting their speech regardless of how you wish it weren't so.
We already have equal rights. What you propose is equal outcome which is a crime against nature and will once again see a withdrawal of those tasked with fulfilling others poorness until we all have equality in being poor. No logical person of wealth will agree to such a lopsided demand.
We all come here with an equal chance to deposit funds into our wallet, an equal chance to grow followers and grow our wallets.
It's not realistic to think we all start out of the gate equally. We weren't equal when we got here. An example of this would be this.
It would be ludicrous for me to think myself and Ctime were equal in our start here. He came with a much larger wallet than myself. We were not equal in our choices in life leading up to our arrival here. He is entitled to the rewards of his start here, as are we all. He owes me nothing because he got a better start than I did.
Equality in outcome is an emotional outlook that isn't grounded in reality and actually tears asunder any foundations those with more to contribute have built.
Communism other than on a voluntary bases destroys all in its path as those who create throw their hands up in the air and go home with their ball.
I would urge you to listen to this brilliant podcast from famigliacurione.
https://blurt.blog/blurt/@famigliacurione/the-blurtopian-experience-big-wallet-big-head
I don’t see it like that at all. Blurt already is a platform that has changed certain features since it’s brginning. Even in the beginning it mirrored the site but took away the downvote... essentially changing the platform to work more in alignment with what users wanted... no downvote button. If the majority of users also wanted no stake to be delegated to people with more stake that would essentially be the same.. tweaking the site to adapt to user preference. I’m not even saying what I would prefer but that I don’t believe the rules on a site make something discriminatory as long as they are applied across the board to everyone. I mean blurt alrwady has rules. It says one can’t plagerise etc. People know if they use blurt that’s a site rule, it doesn’t just discriminate individual people for their actions.
This decision was made before there were users, and it was done out of respect for property rights.
I know this much. If there comes a time where Blurt begins restricting or disrespecting property rights, I'll be leaving. That was the draw that made me decide to do this one more time. If that draw disappears, I will as well just as I did at Steem and Hive. I left Hive believing I was done with all of this, and was waiting with all of my Hive powered down in case the market went back up when I found out about Blurt. It took me much research to understand I would give this one more try.
You mention plagiarism, and that is different. That is a crime in most countries due to it not respecting property rights. I don't advocate for property rights theft, and it's perfectly understandable that in order to shield themselves from being participants in a crime the front ends disallow the action on their sites.
I’m not anti any site rules I’m anti discrimination.
Please explain to me how one using their stake as they wish is discrimination?
I would also point out that the word itself has a mostly negative connotation, which is absurd. One uses the ability to discriminate constantly, usually under the more approved wordage called preferences. We see this as one example in womans romance literature.
The man coveted is usually some musclebound guy who has a shitload of money. It's never the overweight mechanic down at the local car garage who is scraping by to make ends meet and has a shitty selection of clothes that aren't grease stained while paying two ex wives child support and alimony.
Maybe I’m not explaining how I mean. My point is that targeting for example upvu and saying upvu can’t do stuff with his stake is discrimination but adjusting the platform to say not be able to delegate to higher stake accounts isn’t personal descrimiation just making general site updates if a consensus thinks it would make the platform better. To me it’s very different to tell one person they can’t do something than it is to tweak a platform so that certain behaviours are not able to be done. That’s exactly for example what blurt did alrwady by mirroring the original platform but removing the downvote button. Not sure if I’m making sense here.
That merely expands the group being discriminated against to those of larger means though. The downvote button was also a tool of discrimination, only it worked in reverse. It allowed those of larger means to target those of lesser means.
The current model we have that respects all wallets and words regardless of size or topic is in my opinion the best we have. It simply is none of our business what one does with the holdings found within their wallet. If they wish to delegate it for profit and view Blurt as little more than an investment vehicle, I'm glad they are here and have helped add value to the project by powering up to have that stake to delegate.
Do you think that upvoting ourselves is worse than buying votes and delegating to someone to upvote you ?
I believe both actions are equally self stunting ones growth here. By nature, most people will tend to shun those who are stingy with their votes, regardless of how they are being stingy (VTS or self vote). So the folks who primarily self vote heavily or use VTS will lose out on more rewards usually because the main votes they will get are either from themselves directly or through a VTS indirectly.
I think however that those using the VTS are shorting themselves some of their self vote profit however by relegating the self vote to a service who will be wanting a cut from it.
While I don't advocate for heavy self voting or VTS, for the reason I stated above, I will defend anyones right to use their property as they see fit. One of the reasons I came to Blurt and wasn't just done with this whole social blockchain experience was because unlike there (mother and sister chains) where property rights can be nullified with downvote, here property rights are honored, as well as free speech.
Sometimes that freedom means others will act with their property and words in ways we don't embrace, a price worth paying to have those rights myself.
We should rly re name @practicalthought ‘the sage’ tho lol every community needs someone like this.
Thank you for your kind words. :)
My friend @practicalthought, if you don't mind me still calling you that, you are not taking one major thing into consideration, when you state this.
They can to this in less than five minutes a day, then go to the beach. Doesn't sound like a bad deal to me. How many hours do real active members spend on here a day, a week?...then yes they earn more.
Now to think about it, I could be watching a movie with @junglegirl right now instead of putting time and thought into this response. Maybe it's time for Travel Pro to UPVU and check in from time to time. It's a far better time/earnings ratio.....like no comparison.
A demonstration
on
how
little
time
There is a difference between property and something created out of nothing, or code based. I don't think developers bought that blurt power they have. They kind of created the code, that you call here property. But, the code was meant to support decentralization, or to put all the power in their hands ?
If that was to support decentralization in the world and make a new blockchain more decentralized, where people really decide what should be trending, who to vote for as a witness, what development to support ... etc. That would be nice to see of course.
But if those who created the code feels that they own it all here, and they have more rights to decide things, but not the community, or big investors. So, we may have an issue there. Because depending on this post This is how upvu works, I don't see that investor with 12 millions blurt that happy about what's going on.
So, the question I have in mind, who really decide things here ? The stake ? The community ? Or too simply the team on the top ?
Is it proof of work, of stake, of development, or what ? What's the most important concept in blurt ? What's the use case for investors to understand ?
Great questions
First, there is no such thing as decentralization. I'm not sure why so many are under the illusion there is. I think Rycharde sums it up best when he says its a matter of dependencies.
I haven't bothered to check the funds of the co-founders. I personally chose to come give this one more try because of m y research into Jacob. Since my time here, my respect for megadrive has grown immensely.
I find that they have more skin in this than most anyone. They came up with the idea, they funded to make it so. Then through all the tough times they continued funding this to keep it going, ensuring out of their own pocket that the price stayed at least at a level of .003.
They also have skin in this game by the amount of time they have to spend dealing with seeking to improve Blurt. As well as dealing with personality conflicts which at times has went into the realm of verbal abuse.
As for trending, I've yet to ever see a trending section that appealed to me anywhere. So I say we make our own, it's called a follow feed.
The foundation is still calling a lot of the shots, but they could be outvoted as we saw attempted by the whales once before. And I think it might have gotten the votes if he hadn't tried expanding the vote to include all delegations regardless of to whom or what reason. Which would have been a crime against property rights in my eyes.
The case for investors. There is total free speech here. You can even say the most despicable things about the founders here and your words will not be censored, any stake pulls from votes agreeing will be honored. And you can say the most controversial positions, and not only does it stand but all who agree cane reward you and join in, creating a community of like minded folks who are chased out of most corners of the world now.
In a world where places to speak and have ones property honored is shrinking by the day, I'd say this is a pretty good selling point.
All of this is my opinion, and I speak only for myself on this.
Yeah, I respect what they did. And I'm glad they created blurt and still supporting it. I just shared what I think about how things should be done now. I'm just a regular little investor and a content creator. I still can don't know a lot of things. And of course I'll be glad to hear @rycharde opinion about all this.
I just scrolled through his posts and found what I believe was my first encounter to his thoughts on this, to which I find myself in agreement (and have since my first exposure to crypto).
https://blurt.blog/blurt/@rycharde/dependencies-are-more-important-than-decentralisation
I sometimes forget just how brilliant he is. In looking at many of his posts as I scrolled through just now to find this one, it serves a a reminder to me that sometimes there are many posts in an authors blog worth revisiting despite the passage of time.
I'll be curious what your thoughts on the post are. If you comment to him on that post, could you tag me so I can give it a read? I'd greatly appreciate it.
It's always depending on what we mean by decentralization. Even those witnesses can do everything to not lose that power and always stay in charge. Or to not care about that and keep building it for people. But letting only stake to decide what's trending, who should be in charge, is not right to do. We should also consider other concepts. And the more of them will be considered the healthier the space will be. @ultravioletmag said it right, that we have to have the balance between proof of stake and proof of brain. Going fully proof of stake and making mostly corrupted upvotes in trending, for me is not right to do. If those upvotes can be corrupt, so other types of votes could be corrupt as well. Maybe that's the biggest reason why I hated them in steem first, and now in blurt. Imagine most whales turning to upvote bots when such service will be created like the one in steem.
My main concern is with property rights and free speech being protected. If this changes, as I mentioned to her just moments ago, from what there was when I joined I'll probably be leaving as I did with Hive. I powered down quietly there many months before I found out about Blurt and began researching. I had thought I was done with all of this until I understood what was being offered here in freedom of speech and property rights being honored.