How Steemit Disincentivizes Dissent and Drives People Away: A Minnow's Perspective
A couple weeks ago I heard about something called BitConnect and decided to do some research to learn more about it, so I could make a decision to invest or not. Coincidentally, I had just started on Steemit, and came across a blog post discussing it. What I found was really disappointing. I'm going from memory here, so I may not have all the facts straight, and I welcome anyone to point me to the actual blog post. I searched for the post but couldn't find it, a symptom I suspect, of the problem I'm trying to point out.
I believe it was an article from a fairly small/new Steemit blogger talking about BitConnect. I think it may have been a resteem by Craig Grant. Either way, the blogger was talking about BitConnect and saying some fairly positive things about it. Then wham, a whale stepped in and told the blogger BitConnect is a scam and he was downvoting his post. And with that, the conversation was squashed and the new blogger apologized and promised not to do it again.
For someone like me, trying to learn about BitConnect, and use Steemit to do so, this was hugely disappointing. This whale had decided it was a scam and used the power of his downvote to ensure any discussion on the matter was discouraged. Is Bitconnect really a scam, and if so, why? What are the risks involved? Where are good places to read more about the scam? etc. None of these questions could be discussed, because the whale made it clear that talking about BitConnect would have a negative impact on your pocketbook. And once the whales start piling on - and they do pile on - that whole conversation gets downvoted into oblivion.
If you think the conversation about BitConnect could have continued, consider this. In that same blog there was a comment by @craig-grant. Now, I wish I had a link to that post, but I can't find it. I'd like to quote him completely and accurately, but I can't. And I suspect the reason why I can't find that post and comment is because of the low ranking it got. So I'm going to paraphrase here. I welcome Craig into this conversation and invite him to correct me where I may have misremembered what he said. But I remember him saying something to the effect: You never talk about BitConnect on Steemit, the whales think its a scam. Think about the ramifications of that comment. Craig, a whale in his own right, hugely popular on steemit, says the topic you want to discuss should never be discussed on Steemit. The message is pretty clear, on Steemit, there are certain things you don't discuss, or you'll be punished.
Craig's comment was particularly upsetting to me because I follow him on YouTube and he talks about BitConnect over there constantly, and those comments are overwhelmingly enthusiastic. Clearly when Craig goes to Steemit, he censors himself. If Craig recognizes that certain topics are off limits, you better believe that us minnows who are watching him are going to think so as well.
This wasn't a one time occurrence. I searched for 15 minutes for this blog post and came across some disheartening things. Do a Steemit search for "steemcleaners bitconnect", and what you'll see is comment after comment of steemcleaners using their downvote to intimidate people into silence. Even worse, you get downvoted by this guy if your post might be a scam. Look at the exchange at this post: https://steemit.com/blog/@blapone420/genesis-mining-is-where-its-at#@blapone420/re-steemcleaners-re-blapone420-genesis-mining-is-where-its-at-20170605t065423110z
"While it may not be a scam in your opinion, it could be considered spam if this is the only type of content you post." - Steemcleaners
The blogger responded to this comment by telling the Whale to look at his blog and he would see this is not the only thing he blogs about, but there was no response and the downvote remained. If you go back to the search results, you'll see the same pattern over and over again. If the post is about a topic the Whale doesn't like, the pretense of potential "spam" is used to downvote it, the blogger responds that it is not the only thing they blog about, and the downvote remains. And if you look closer, you'll see additional Whales piling on with their own downvotes, ensuring the post is swept under the rug and the blogger walks away with a lesson they won't forget.
This pattern of abusing your downvote is just one example of a much broader trend on Steemit. I've been reading Steemit posts for a couple of weeks now, and I rarely see a disagreement between people, let alone an argument. A vast majority of the posts are happy and cheerful. Controversial topics? Where? I can't find them. I don't doubt that they are there, but there are so few of them that I haven't seen them yet.
Now why is that? Because STEEM's incentive structure is set up to promote agreement and discourage disagreement. Think about it. Your blogs get paid for upvotes, not views. What is going to get more money, a blog that is happy and cheerful and panders to it's audience, or a controversial article that challenges the audience's beliefs, and only a minority might outright agree with it? Bloggers have little incentive to challenge their audience, and as a result they don't do so. When a blogger accidentally stumbles across a controversial topic, the Whales school-in to silence him.
To tell the truth, it took me two weeks to write this post because of my fear of rocking the boat. I rarely back down from a debate or a controversial topic, but in this case, I can see a system so clearly incentivized against people like me, that I'm afraid to talk about this issue for fear of the whales. I hope this isn't true, but I expect this post to be downvoted into oblivion, if I can get anyone to even read it.
Unless STEEM's incentive structure is fixed, STEEM will not be successful. Right now there's a lot of hype and enthusiasm around it, and that hype and enthusiasm are propping it up, causing the price to rise and people to flood in. But like the story of the Stepford Wives, all this happiness and politeness is just a facade. There is something wrong here, and people will eventually notice. Once that happens, another social media platform that doesn't disincentivize disagreement will take its place.
Note: I am not an investor in BitConnect. After researching it on websites other than Steemit, I think there is too much third party risk and have decided against investing in it.
I'm new to Steemit and I have learned so much from so many. Most of the fighting (there is a lot of it) seems to be happening between the big whales. Craig Grant has been a huge help in understanding Steem, Bit Connect and Genesis Mining. He won me as a subscriber for life.
And I think its ok to disagree if you can do it respectfully in a post. If i disagree with you, most of my motivation is going to be to understand your point of view and then thank that person for sharing that point of view.
Thanks for commenting. It's interesting that you've observed most of the fighting is occurring between the big whales. Perhaps this is because the whales are more impervious to downvotes than minnows. Let me ask you this, when you have had someone disagree with you, have you upvoted their comment? Do you think this is something that people do any significant amount of time? If you do, that's awesome, and I'm impressed by that.
It just depends when someone gets my votes. I don't delve out my votes easily. People have to earn them. Fighting between whales have been around since the beginning of time. Alphas will always fight for control and that is what's going on now. Steem is going to get big and I think its creators have realized that some of that control needs to be wrestled away at some point. We'll just have to wait and see.
I thought so too! this social network is too polite and people get paid to be nice! especially in a world where hate,disagreements,fake news and scams exist. This censorship is anti cryptocurrency world and shouldn't brew any longer
It's using a downvote, not abusing it.
Yes, you're not wrong. Speaking up against BitConnect and other ponzis has cost me but it's still the right thing to do.
I think there's some of that, but people who express themselves honestly are rewarded too.
I'm really sorry if promotion of a scam got downvoted. Just kidding, scammers don't need to get incentivized any more here. https://steemit.com/scam/@pfunk/promoting-a-scam-makes-you-a-scammer
To all low-rent low-self-esteem people who think they need to grift to make money or bitcoin: You're on Steem now, change your ways. Don't take offense to a downvote if you can't.
I have no issue with someone speaking their mind. If they think something is a scam, they should certainly say so and engage in conversation if they want. But that is not what happens. Instead, the whale uses their downvote to end the conversation before it can begin. This is not about incentivizing the scammer. This is about allowing a free conversation, not just when the conversation is about something people can agree upon, but also when people disagree. You may not see it this way, but you are using the power of your downvote to secure your position as the decider of what is a scam on Steemit, and consequentially, the ideas that people are exposed to. Heck, I don't like BitConnect, and think it is most likely as you said, a pyramid scheme, but I wouldn't use my downvote to stifle discussion about it.
I appreciated the majority of your comment, but you lost me on the last paragraph. You seem to be calling new users like myself "low-rent low-self-esteem". That may not be your intent, but given the context of my post, the reference to low-rent is readily interpreted as an insult to new users. And the second sentence, which is presumably still addressed to those low-rent low-self-esteem people, implies that those who take offense to a downvote are scammers, and those who take offense to a downvote do so, because they can't downvote themselves (i.e. their downvote is so weak as to be inconsequential). If I interpreted that right, and I admit, I could have misinterpreted, that's a pretty cavalier, indifferent attitude which perfectly illustrates the whale vs minnow, upper and lower class problem that will ruin Steemit in the long-run.
Steemcleaners you mentioned are associated with pfunk, 8 days ago Steemcleaners received 200.000 STEEM from pfunk
I downvote promotion of it, and let people know why. I am calling out people that seek to make a quick buck from scamming others for having low self esteem. Here on Steem you don't need to scam people to make money, and yet people still try. I take that as evidence of not having any belief in one's own perspective, skills, gifts and talents.
I guess saying "low-rent" isn't necessary and it's not a reference to one's STEEM Power. It's a reference to the quality of person one is if they think they need to grift to make money.
Congratulations @infinite-monkey! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honnor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPIf you want to support the SteemitBoard project, your upvote for this notification is welcome!
yeah, steemcleaners has redefined spam into something he/she doesn't like. If someone doesn't like something he or she doesn't have to look at it! Bottom line it is censorship, just like youtube's recent actions. So much for steemit being an open system where you can express yourself! Only if the whales like what you have to say!