@Khrom brought up some very interesting points that show not only why DPoS will not be a successful social media platform as it is right now, but the mentality behind the structure, that ensures it's lack of success..
The use (blockchain), and the utility it offers (value), lay in far more important directions in my opinion.
These directions are something that can never be addressed- or investigated - with the current libtarded, socialist/collectivists ethos of the majority.
Why ?..Lack of personal conviction based on ethics.
It's all about the token prices and 'getting rich'...
This was my comment to some points that he raised , and the basis of his reply to me. (the one discussed in this post).
(khrom's comment)...Without good content and engagement Blurt becomes toilet paper.
Which account on blurt over this last 12 months has more genuine engagement (numbers) and range of topics (and genre), than myself ?
Which account has the least support from 'muh witnesses'
Which account was threatened to be frozen?
The blurt blockchain t-shirt, 'doesn't say how the mouth behaves', I guess..
(krom) Without good content and engagement Blurt becomes toilet paper.
"I wouldn't upvote you if you wrote the next Shakespeare.." ...A witness?..lolol
(not that it really matters much, now - imo).
His comments..(parsed)
@khrom
But the thing is that the situation is like this because there are too few people and too little commitment. If instead of 1,000 active people there were 10,000 or 100,000, among them you would certainly find more curators like Mariusz and me who support your content and so much would not depend on a few.
Or...alternatively - the situation is like this because the crytpo sphere and DPoS specifically - is a platform that is based in an authoritarian rule, where merit is not rewarded if it goes against ideology, but sucking up to large stakeholders, is. (socialist in ethos).
For example - Substack's.
This platform started in 2017.
Substack announced in March 2023 that it had crossed the 2 million paid subscription mark
Substack generated 24.57 million visits in September 2021, up from 18 million in April 2021
The exact number of Substack users is not publicly available, and only 5% to 10% of Substack users subscribe to a paid newsletter. In April 2022, Substack.com received 30.6 million website visitors.
Substacks users, content creators, vlaue content - and pay for it ! (not even some conceptual coin).
QUALITY CONTENT PAYS.
At the time f of inception - media personalities, journalists, and you tubers were CRYING OUT for somewhere to publish.
WHY...Why did they not flock to DPoS social media?
Stefan Molynuex, styhexanhammer (to name just two very successful content creators in their own right, and well over a million followers to their channels), dabble into steem - and then left.
They had zero support and promotion from ideologically driven leftoids/libtards.
(but jerry banfield had $100's of dollars for his 'crypto to the moon', material).
'Build it and they will come', only works if what you build is an attractive proposition.
All the free market, merit based creators either left, (or are still downvoted to oblivion on hive).
Subtacks WAS an attractive proposition to content creators. - the results reflect that if you compare it with any dpos platform with a , nepotistic, 'crabs in bucket', mentality.
When the product is not content - but token production - the building doesn't appear to be so attractive to those with merit based ethos - and 'they' certainly ain't coming....
....to avoid going around in circles re- what 'the product' is - lets define it as 'the item or service available, at the point where a trade is executed, between parties'....
' The trade '- is tokens - not content.
@khrom
It is obvious that if someone doesn't support you, they won't support you. Unlike hive, however, we have eliminated the problem that if someone doesn't like you, they not only don't support you but also downvote you.
Well, personally I don't like Shakespeare, so I wouldn't vote for him even if he wrote here personally :P
NO!
This is not 'obvious', at all.
If Karl Marx was blogging his communist bullshit on blurt- I would upvote it.
Why?
Because it has value (just not the same value that the 2nd cousin to Rothschilds thought it was, while he was writing it).
...and if you didn't upvote the quality of shakespeare if he appeared on a blog for 'personal taste' reasons - and not cold hard business reasons - that would make you a retard ! ...lolol
(I've presumed a 'tongue in cheek' response, from yourself in this case.)
See the difference?
One perspective is based on a personal preferences and 'likes' - (the DPoS mentality) - and one perspective is based on quality information.
The downvote function only goes to serve those with the authoritarian mentality, more- it does NOT eliminate the psychology behind the people who wish to control others free speech.
(see @megadrive' s change in his blurtblog platform - where any user can censor another user - and that censored user - if using blurt blog- IS INVISIBLE to all other users (and not just the account that muted them).
.....The psychology of those with the authoritarian (control freak) perspective will emerge - one way or another.
@khrom
The issue is that you always do some centralization because blockchain is a reflection of what society presents itself and society is highly centralized and we have 90% of the wealth in the hands of 1% of psychopaths.
Blockchain DOESN'T reflect that - for all the idiocy in the current culrutral zeitgiest - it IS shifting back to sanity (as I pointed out a couple of years ago) - and that is the issue that libtarded dimwits can't seem to comprehend.
Subtacks, medium, patreon, subscribestar, models - ?????????????
....Unless , of course - it was NEVER actually meant to, and is just a 'token printing ponzi scheme' to extract wealth from the naive, into the coffers of the parasite class...hmmm....
(that model kinda has more 'solidity' to it, doesn't it?)
... Even if it was intended to be a social media platform - The DpoS construct means that the only way it can ever be altered is by buying tokens and thus enriching the authoritarian nazguls along the way (funny, that...hmmm).
To change the system, you must FIRST, make the people who created the system, very wealthy...yeah....er....how about...NO..?
How about support a merit based platform instead, and see organic growth from the quality of the product ?
@khrom
The problem is that already on Hive it was possible to observe that there was a certain dispersion of this wealth and this system worked, but that was when Nazi organizations such as hivewaters entered the picture and were destroying those who did not want to allow their influence on the platform to increase too much. Look at all those who don't think leftistly.
See the lack of support for users on blurt who show- BY ACTION AND TIME INVESTMENT - 'commitment' (that's me by the way).
Why the lack of support?
Because I 'offend' people with my truths.
Because I'm 'howwible'.
It's pathetic. It doesn't reflect on my material - but it does reflect, and show, the childish, emotionally retarded mentality of those witnesses and large stakeholders.
@blurtbooster, et al - it's truly cringe worthy - and people who visit the site , see this , day in and day out - An attractive look to find more users - or a nepotistic perspective to reward 'the in crowd' of fellow nazgul ?..hmmm... )
@khrom
....here, although such a megadrive would certainly be happy to downvote you together with others, they can at most wave their finger and due to the fact that there are not enough witnesses who will agree to freezing accounts (not to mention the fact that it would be suicide for this blockchain) in this matter they won't do anything either.
Yeah, but THINK ABOUT IT.
17 witneees to make a decision such as this.
17
1000 users, and 17 over emotionalized libtard collectivists to make such a decisions on another persons account...based on butt hurt ego pain, and offended, 'muh fweellings'...seriously?
Can you not see how this looks to the outside world?
....17
It would still be 17, even if there were 10,000 users with that 'powerrrrr'..(bless).
Merit based platform don't have this problem....and users actually pay to see the content (not some free token ) - ....because it has value...
@khrom
(not to mention the fact that it would be suicide for this blockchain) in this matter they won't do anything either...
But it is never known.
It is a subjective matter, based on time, personal preference, fear of loss, and circumstance - that's all.
How many times have I posted about large stakeholders (the ones with the most to lose) supporting my initiative to fund the website entirely from blurt upvotes - and promote it (one way or another) ?
For me personally, and i have been in this EXACT situation regarding an ex-employee of mine who branched out on his own.
He was a very smart dude, with creative talent oozing out of him (far more talented and intelligent than myself).
While his new venture was not competing with my own - they did have 'crossover' points.
What did I do ?
I advertised his new company, and supported the fuck out of him - and wished him all the luck in the world..
Why?
Because it was good business to do so.
Now, lets have a look at all the recent upvotes from large stakeholders since I mentioned my initiative, and extrapolate from that in terms of -
a) business acumen - seeing the big picture of my initiative in terms of blurts success..
b) ego issues, and the inability to let critical thinking and logic because of ego.
c) the longevity of a platform that's based on poor a), and b), qualities...
Shall I do another mic drop, just for effect?
Hell, yeah !
