New Milestones: 4k Account Tokens and 80 rep.
At these levels it takes me around 170 days to farm 1000 account tokens on Hive. Quite the grind indeed! My last milestone post was February 16, 2022. But I also have another Milestone to report, and that's finally hitting 80 reputation... a feat that I was fairly certain I'd never accomplish (along with never breaking 5k Steem). Now we aren't even called Steem anymore. Crazy times.
https://hiveblocks.com/@edicted
https://hivebuzz.me/ranking
I now find myself on the front page in the top 25 "reputation" on Hive. Pretty weird feeling, I must admit. Especially considering that many of these names are inactive or just straight up don't even count like @hbd.funder at #1. For example, @chbartist has an account worth $2.50 and hasn't posted since 2019. That makes @taskmaster4450 and @tarazkp our most valued and consistent posters on the entire network. I feel like I was following those guys way before they made it to the top, and the risk of doing the whole, "I was here before it was cool," gag.
Reputation is meaningless
@dan's vision for Steem was that everyone was going to play nice and money would flow around the network in accordance with how much value was being brought to the network. Let's be honest... if that were true we'd of flipped Bitcoin by now. And yet still, after being put in situations where this platform should have gotten the axe over and over again... we still stand. Not a derelict chain but still the same struggle-bus grind as always. Let's be real though it will always be a grind for someone even if/when the top makes it big.
So while my 80 reputation means basically nothing in terms of actual reputation, it's still just one of those hardcore unit-bias milestones that gets into your head and makes you feel like it does mean something, or at least that it should. Gamification is a powerful drug.
So reputation is a relic of the past.
But we still use it and display it, even though it doesn't even exist on the blockchain and is just some random pointless number being updated virtually by the nodes. Reminds me that we are in dire need of an actual reputation system that actually means something. Not just on Hive but in the 'real' world as well.
I constantly see so many instances of entitled spoiled child-like Karens running around acting like they are owned the world, and when they don't get handed their ridiculous expectation they try to make life hell for the people that are trying to provide them with service. How many 1-star reviews on on Yelp or Google or Amazon or where-ever else are littered with these asshole that just popped in to complain about something that is completely irrelevant to the product being provided?
The post office took an extra day to get it to me.
One star.
Bro... fuck off.
I've been doing research on reputation systems for a while now, and the solution to these problems is surprisingly simple: reviews cannot be unidirectional or else they become meaningless. Reviewers need a reputation just as much as products and services do.
Review the reviewer
If someone at a restaurant is a total dumpster-fire and leaves a one-star review because their ridiculous... what should that review count for? Basically nothing. However, all these reviewing systems give the Karen an equal vote to everyone else rather than nullifying their vote.
Hm... vote nullification sounds like a slippery slope.
Certainly that's true in certain contexts... not so much for reviewing fuzzy slipper-socks. There's also the question of: "Does DPOS solve this?" Do the Karens have stake in the network? Or are they just visitors looking to impose their will on others? Logic would dictate that the chance someone could be a valued member of a community while also being a self-entitled dumpster-fire is low. Definitely not zero though... as we all know that power corrupts. But at this point I'm just rambling.
Conclusion
Milestones are fun, but they are even more fun when they actually mean something. The human brain loves to find meaning in unit-bias, round numbers, and number go up.
While my 80 rep was a much more difficult milestone to achieve, the real value is in those 4000 account tokens I now control. The ability to onboard 4000+ people to Hive is going to end up being a huge advantage to me when mainstream adoptions rolls around. Kudos to me!
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
This post has been manually curated by @steemflow from Indiaunited community. Join us on our Discord Server.
Do you know that you can earn a passive income by delegating to @indiaunited. We share 100 % of the curation rewards with the delegators.
Here are some handy links for delegations: 100HP, 250HP, 500HP, 1000HP.
Read our latest announcement post to get more information.
Please contribute to the community by upvoting this comment and posts made by @indiaunited.
Wow, 4000 tokens. That is pretty awesome. I think I only have just about 100. Probably not even that many. I used to be able to collect up to six a day or something like that, but the number has went down over the past year or so.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I mean if you think about it 100 is still a ton.
100 people? That's a lot.
I don't even know 100 people to give accounts to :D
Yeah, that is good point! I don't really know 100 people either! I still want to have them though! Nice photo of Kate from John and Kate Plus 8 for the Karen reference!
Who's Karen?
Never mind... I believe I threw a comment at one of your posts noticing you've reached rep. 80.
I know what you mean by saying it's basically meaningless but what's with this account claiming marathon? Should I claim some as well?
Posted using LeoFinance Mobile
You need to have like 5k-10k Hive powered up to claim accounts.
They cost a ton of RCs.
Out of the equation then... I'm financially poor but rich at heart :))
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_(slang)
Wow! Congratulation man
It must be hard to reach the milestone.
Nullify the Karen reviews sounds great, but how do we do that? The reviewee can't be trusted to not be 100% unbiased in their review of the reviewer (if that makes sense), obviously. So how exactly do we give her a rating?
The problem with review systems is they are always gamed. Like ebay, where after you buy an item there is pressure both from the system itself and the seller to give the seller a 5 star rating. Some (like me) I'm sure resist the pressure, but I'm guessing most people don't. I don't use uber and the like (the taxi union in Japan has gotten them banned from the country, so I haven't even had the chance), but I've read stories about both sides (drivers and customers) gaming the rating system.
So how do design a system that can't be corrupted...? Now that seems like a challenge.
That account creation stockpile is fucking amazing! Great job! I've been stashing some away when I think to as well but I'm down to (or perhaps up to?) 7 after a few onboardings early this year (that subsequently went nowhere BUT HEY, an effort was made).
And I have to admit... despite being a totally useless number, I'm definitely eyeing up rep and hoping to smash that 70 rep hurdle as soon as I can because it's just fun to see if I can do it lol.
Is there an automated way to claim account tokens ? And also is there a way to delegate them to others, who take care of account creation ?
I leave a lot of reviews in a popular, centralized map app, and sometimes these are 1star reviews.
For example:
Very good looking bakery had matching expensive prices and very low quality blueberry pastry. So even if that was my first visit there I was upset with this business strategy as I see it not fair and left 1star with detailed explanation.
Should I be reviewed as 1star reviewer? Would bidirectional review system disincentivise any critical feedback? I see leaving negative comments as in general positive action to improve quality of service/product, but I can imagine I'd do that less often to avoid lowering my reviewer score.
I can imagine basing my reviewer ranking on opinions of other reviewers. If others agree with my reviews my score goes higher and my reviews are shown on the top/more valuable in a weighted average.
What are your thoughts on that?
This assumes that your score as a reviewer would go down for posting a poor review.
Inherently doesn't this assume that the 1-star review was incorrect and you shouldn't have done it?
If the one star review was warranted then your score as a reviewer should go up within such a system.
So you give an entire establishment with dozens of products a one-star review because of a single item?
Again, maybe this is an infrastructure issue.
Perhaps the ability to review only the blueberry pastry should be a thing.
Obviously that review is worthless compared to someone that's been there dozens of times and has tried everything.
Just saying.
I assume owners would act in revenge on people leaving low score reviews to deter further negative comments. Owners operating within capitalistic incentive structure might give no shit if my review was correct or not. They might only care if it attracts or repel next customer. And the game goes on.
The question is who would warrant correctness of reviews? It works now somehow decentralizishly while you read more than 5-10comments, for sure there are less Karens than not-Karen :)
Reviews are a narrow case of reputation system. These are inherently biased and based on various subcjective criteria.
Mine was emotional in this case. I can only assume quality of other products, but outlook of place and prices set my expactations higher. So this is a review more about the place than this single pastry. I added information this was my first visit there. Anybody is free to take his/her own conclusions.
If you'd enter this bakery, and there would be a dogshit in the middle or rotten bread on shelf. Would that be sufficient reason for 1 star review? Even if that could be the only day when this happened?
In general I'd assume there is a similar variety of reviewers and review readers, and if there is too much Karen-comments it might be just Karen-place ;)
Congrats on your milestones!
Again this assumes that it is possible to engage in a flag-war within such a system. Why would conflicts of interest like that be allowed? There are many ways to gauge whether or not reviewers know what they are doing. If a reviewer is using a 5-star system and then only gives 1-star and 5-star reviews (which is very common) then the network already knows they are full of shit just by the way in which they interact with the system.
A good reviewer will automatically have a bell-curve distribution.
On a 5-star system a good reviewer will, on average, give a three-star rating, with 2 and 4 happening frequently while 1 and 5 should only be given out like 10% of the time or less. The entire point of a system like this is to pinpoint the conflicts of interest and eliminate subjective over-emotional reviews based on a single personal experience.
I see your point, not so sure about the bell curve here though. There is an assumption that the median average experience is equal to arithmetic average experience, which doesn't seem to be rooted in reality. The quality of service is constantly upgraded, hance prevalance of 5 star reviews, if everything is ok, there is no need to lower the score. There is a gratitude.
Owners and service providers and incentivised to provide nice experience. And on the other side of spectrum there are people.whose expectations were not met. And this is a situation when some people decide to leave a review, and only then. Does it make these groups of people full of shit? Even if they might be the same people sometimes?
The game theory here seems to be much more complex than influence of emotions on the system. Sure, some people are terrible at giving feedback, and sometimes, we all have this bad day, when one small detail can make a difference. It seems to be more than simple algorithm.
Which is exactly why a 5 option rating system isn't even appropriate within the context of the given example. Just another way we can see that the rating systems are inherently flawed to the core. For something like a restaurant review it makes way more sense to just have 3 options, as most reviewers are never going to need more precision than that.
This is also something I have talked about at length, and I even came up with a way to make different rating systems compatible with each other using odd-point rankings.. If there are an odd number of options available every ranking can be reduced down to a percentage that meshes will with the other ranking systems. The most common systems being 3-point, 5-point, and 15-point rankings. Where 3 point is pass/neutral/fail, 5 point is 5-stars or A-B-C-D-F, and 15 point is A-B-C-D-F with a +/- option. The maximum option would be 101 point scale where reviews are graded directly with the percentage itself from 0%-100%
Quality milestones!! Well done. I recently passed through 70 Rep and was pure thrilled, so to hit 80 Rep must be unreal altogether!! Well done.
I don't understand your other milestone though, what does the 1000/4000 farmed coins mean?
Anyone on Hive can purchase account tokens with a large amount of RCs.
With an account token creating an account on Hive is free.
Without an account token creating an account on Hive costs 3 Hive (sent to @null).
Ah right OK, that explains why your RCs are low. Thanks for the steer 👌
I’ve got a thousand account creation tokens but might never reach two thousand. Once RC delegations go live, doing that might be far more tempting than claiming tickets.
And that's a great thing that should be expected.
We don't want to be using RCs to create accounts.
We want Hive blocks to be full and for this chain to operate at full capacity.
It wouldn't make sense to spend that many RCs on new accounts when the accounts that already exist are clamoring for bandwidth. We have to follow the free-market on this one.
100 hive rep is like Bitcoin hitting 100k!
You've done pretty well for yourself. At the very least the reputation is evidence to your consistency. Kudos to you!
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Congratulations I really appreciate every of your contribution in the blockchain, it's definitely a work well-done
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
We could use you in the hive-dr for the high rep people that go rogue.
https://discord.gg/tVjRSwTG9v
Congrats on 80 Rep!! Wow. Love your posts. Was surprised to see i was here b4 u!! Hive On!! 🍦
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Wow!
I wouldn't say that RPs are completely meaningless. RPs are extremely resistant to downvotes as well as upvotes. If your rep somehow ends up below 15 or in the negative, you must've done something so messed up so as to upset the community or a portion of it. I'd be much more weary of absorbing whatever you say. On the other hand, people with high rep are much more trustworthy. This might be meaningless to you right now, but when HIVE explodes and adoption skyrockets, reputation is gonna matter more than ever before.
Reputation is guarded by three things: Time, effort and community approval. the foremost two are essential in a good-quality article, but what gives rise to rep is the approval of the community by them throwing votes your way. There is no way to purchase vote for your account, but your Love Handles (really?) paves way to purchasing accounts with high rep.
I like that idea!
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I love a good meaningless milestone post.
A fun game to play when you claim your accounts is this..
How close to 0 can you get with yer RCs....?
Just don't let the bots know, shhhhhhhhh they're EVERYWHERE!