Viewing a response to: @acidyo/reset
> Although I am a bit tired of the general complaining and whining and feeling a little bit like "these people don't even deserve a pump of price", I still believe that Concerning any complex topic (like STEEM <em>is</em>) there always exisit different opinions, and we should actually be thankful to people who question decisions, are having doubts but also new ideas and suggestions. Sometimes it's criticism which leads to further progress or prevents premature actions. I am sure that many of the "whiners" care about STEEM and want to improve it as much as you do (who doesn't care need not to "whine"). And I fully understand everybody who is getting nervous considering the actual value of STEEM and our rank at CoinMarketCap ...
| post_id | 79,090,805 |
|---|---|
| author | jaki01 |
| permlink | pwae0m |
| category | mental |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["mental"],"app":"steemit\/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-08-15 16:34:00 |
| last_update | 2019-08-15 16:35:51 |
| depth | 1 |
| children | 9 |
| net_rshares | 230,427,007,770 |
| last_payout | 2019-08-22 16:34:00 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.058 SBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.017 SBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| promoted | 0.000 SBD |
| body_length | 739 |
| author_reputation | 307,452,322,299,597 |
| root_title | Reset |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 SBD |
| percent_steem_dollars | 10,000 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| sbi3 | 0 | 229,386,729,603 | 30.87% | ||
| mixr | 0 | 1,040,278,167 | 5% |
I don't mean general criticism, I mean the obvious trolls and negative ones that always flock to the steemitblog posts like a moth to a flame. All they do is complain, compare and bring negativity even though things could be a lot worse around here. Why do you think I would mean people who are trying to make things better and are questioning the upcoming changes?
| post_id | 79,090,976 |
|---|---|
| author | acidyo |
| permlink | pwaec7 |
| category | mental |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["mental"],"app":"steemit\/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-08-15 16:40:57 |
| last_update | 2019-08-15 16:40:57 |
| depth | 2 |
| children | 4 |
| net_rshares | 0 |
| last_payout | 2019-08-22 16:40:57 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| promoted | 0.000 SBD |
| body_length | 366 |
| author_reputation | 1,572,775,251,470,663 |
| root_title | Reset |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 SBD |
| percent_steem_dollars | 10,000 |
> Why do you think I would mean people who are trying to make things better and are questioning the upcoming changes? I have the impression that anybody who writes "Great!" or "Impressive news!" under an @steemitblog article has rather good chances of receiving some upvotes (also from the team), even that doesn't really contribute anything (and, yes, it's OK just to express satisfation with the efforts of Steemit, Inc.). As opposed to this for me it seems that in quite some cases people who are having some doubts, questions or even criticize things tend to be considered as "naysayers" (in a negative sense). Maybe our perspectives on these things differ because you tend to see the changes of HF 21 very positive while I am having some concerns.
| post_id | 79,091,280 |
|---|---|
| author | jaki01 |
| permlink | pwaevn |
| category | mental |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["mental"],"users":["steemitblog"],"app":"steemit\/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-08-15 16:52:36 |
| last_update | 2019-08-15 16:53:45 |
| depth | 3 |
| children | 3 |
| net_rshares | 211,645,654,672 |
| last_payout | 2019-08-22 16:52:36 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.053 SBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.017 SBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| promoted | 0.000 SBD |
| body_length | 754 |
| author_reputation | 307,452,322,299,597 |
| root_title | Reset |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 SBD |
| percent_steem_dollars | 10,000 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| sbi6 | 0 | 211,645,654,672 | 76.08% |
Oh okay great, so I'm being positive to get a comment upvote or I'm not being critical because I don't care about Steem. Thanks for your input that was really refreshing. Some people have been against the current system ever since the first bid bots started popping up, hoping there will be better things to do with your stake that would overshadow them but we all know how that went and how it's been a race to the bottom ever since, multiplied by the crypto market in general. Think to yourself how many less accounts/real people would be active today on Steem if the 3-5 active curation projects with a meager 1-1.5M SP altogether didn't exist while there's 50-80M SP if not more in bid bots to sell attention where no one demands it which instead ends up just giving shits a profitable ROI while the owners thank the gods they were lucky enough to be at the right place at the right time and beg the right people for a delegation for their shitty bid bot clone. They may not be the best changes but they surely are better than what we have going for us right now.
| post_id | 79,091,457 |
|---|---|
| author | acidyo |
| permlink | pwaf90 |
| category | mental |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["mental"],"app":"steemit\/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-08-15 17:00:36 |
| last_update | 2019-08-15 17:00:36 |
| depth | 4 |
| children | 2 |
| net_rshares | 0 |
| last_payout | 2019-08-22 17:00:36 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| promoted | 0.000 SBD |
| body_length | 1,071 |
| author_reputation | 1,572,775,251,470,663 |
| root_title | Reset |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 SBD |
| percent_steem_dollars | 10,000 |
Thanks for the recent unvote without giving us a reason btw, nice to see you voting on a non-witness instead.
| post_id | 79,091,022 |
|---|---|
| author | acidyo |
| permlink | pwaeev |
| category | mental |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["mental"],"app":"steemit\/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-08-15 16:42:33 |
| last_update | 2019-08-15 16:42:33 |
| depth | 2 |
| children | 3 |
| net_rshares | 0 |
| last_payout | 2019-08-22 16:42:33 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| promoted | 0.000 SBD |
| body_length | 109 |
| author_reputation | 1,572,775,251,470,663 |
| root_title | Reset |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 SBD |
| percent_steem_dollars | 10,000 |
<b>a)</b> I simply <em>feel</em> I don't like the constant very high @ocdb votes for some users. I know they pay for it, but nevertheless, that's just not my cup of tea ... These days when I changed the witness vote I saw for example @firepower receiving them regularly ... <b>b)</b> I also think a bot like @ocd with more than 150000 SP could vote for <em>more</em> different users (<em>if</em> there should be a bot at all). It has a self-vote rate of over 13 % and 'only' is currently upvoting 89 different accounts. I curate manually only (which is more time-consuming), but am currently upvoting 93 different accounts! I understand the whitelist concept but I don't <em>really</em> like it (even if in my opinion your bot is still better than most others). I think <em>every</em> author should have a chance to receive an upvote <em>if</em> he produces good content. Better lets upvote seven different authors for seven different great posts, than seven times one 'quality' author on any whitelist (I exaggerated a little bit now to make clear what I mean). You are very save within the list of top 20 witnesses anyway. I normally don't inform witnesses when changing them. I don't say I won't vote for you again in future. Which "non-witness" I am upvoting instead? As far as I remember I replaced you by @timcliff.
| post_id | 79,091,914 |
|---|---|
| author | jaki01 |
| permlink | pwafwm |
| category | mental |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["mental"],"users":["ocdb","firepower","ocd","timcliff"],"app":"steemit\/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-08-15 17:14:48 |
| last_update | 2019-08-15 17:14:48 |
| depth | 3 |
| children | 2 |
| net_rshares | 203,168,619,862 |
| last_payout | 2019-08-22 17:14:48 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.051 SBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.017 SBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| promoted | 0.000 SBD |
| body_length | 1,327 |
| author_reputation | 307,452,322,299,597 |
| root_title | Reset |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 SBD |
| percent_steem_dollars | 10,000 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| sbi4 | 0 | 203,168,619,862 | 38.15% |
Why are we discussing ocdb? You know I make nothing from it and if I could choose I wouldn't want it to exist at all and use that stake for curation instead but since those 3-4M SP would instead go to other bid bots and enrich their owners and shit all over trending it exists because this system allowed it. HF21 will allow it too and possibly make it an even better alternative but I never supported anything that required bids, ocdb exists just to mitigate all of the other shit. Yes there are some users that abuse ocdb too, do you want to curate it daily for free? No? Well maybe the free downvotes will help turn it into something better - which you apparently are against or have concerns over. >Which "non-witness" I am upvoting instead? That's a great question! Anyway, I'm not in the best place right now but cherrypicking a random quote from my post and labeling me someone who is against criticism during these times is not easy to swallow, didn't mean to make it personal though if it came off as that. I'm gonna stop here as to not say something I might regret later, even though right now I could not care less.
| post_id | 79,092,230 |
|---|---|
| author | acidyo |
| permlink | pwagb2 |
| category | mental |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["mental"],"app":"steemit\/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-08-15 17:23:27 |
| last_update | 2019-08-15 17:23:27 |
| depth | 4 |
| children | 1 |
| net_rshares | 0 |
| last_payout | 2019-08-22 17:23:27 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 SBD |
| promoted | 0.000 SBD |
| body_length | 1,130 |
| author_reputation | 1,572,775,251,470,663 |
| root_title | Reset |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 SBD |
| percent_steem_dollars | 10,000 |