What keeps you from using your daily free downvotes?


What keeps you from using your daily free downvotes?


downvotes.jpg

Please use the opportunity to further elaborate on your answers. I'm very interested in your opinion. I will distribute a total of 5 SBD among the most insightful comments on the matter. Thank you!


  • I find it already difficult enough to allocate my daily quota of upvotes.

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.

  • Disagreeing with too high rewards just isn't mine.

  • I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.

  • I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.

  • Free downvotes? I didn't know there was such a thing.

  • Other reasons (please explain)

    Answer the question at dpoll.xyz.


Comments 113


Voted for

  • Free downvotes? I didn't know there was such a thing.
17.10.2019 19:59
1

If it interests you, this might be a good starter to learn more about the economic changes that were introduced not long ago.

20.10.2019 08:55
0

Other reasons

Stopped for now after receiving some pms asking why i downvoted. I can stand asking on steem but i really dislike pms

17.10.2019 20:03
1

Everyone hates PMS

17.10.2019 20:05
0

I can well relate to that. I haven't found the option to globally restrict PMs to direct contacts on Discord. In the absence of that I don't respond to them most of the times. But it remains kind of unpleasant having sitting them in your inbox unanswered.

20.10.2019 09:03
0

maybe can set only receive msg from friends but then again it’s good to keep an open discord.

Posted using Partiko iOS

20.10.2019 15:16
0

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
    • I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.
    • I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.
17.10.2019 20:05
1

Thank you for participating in the poll.

As for the last bullet, you may agree that the risk for receiving retaliation is simply a numbers game. The broader DVs are used the lower the risk of receiving them in return. Minnows would play a critical role in diluting the effect of reciprocal DVs.

20.10.2019 09:10
0

hello , thanks for your infomation

17.10.2019 20:06
0

Voted For :

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
17.10.2019 20:07
0

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.

I don't always have the time to find enough for my 2.5 DV's per day. I do flag when I can and quite often get shit for doing it like yesterday's episode.

Explaining time and time ago is annoying and sending them the bidbotophant often gets their backs up.

This is the Bidbotophant link, I'm sure you have seen it.

Despite what it says, I have up-voted your post :)

17.10.2019 20:07
1

see thats the reason why I try not to downvote anybody, just in heavy cases I will and this is just 5 times in my steemlife.
It was nice to get flagged by you (my company account don-thomas), you are one of the rare ones who answers even if it was not the answer I expected but anyway an answer is better than non.

18.10.2019 10:56
1

Thank you for commenting.

It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.

I can relate to that. I think it's mainly because one tends to question the distribution of a downvote much more critically than that is the case with an upvote. And this questioning takes time. Ideally, a downvote should be as easy to distribute as an upvote. But I don't know how realistic it is that we will ever get there.

I know of course the Bidbottophant. Poor guy lost his eye already. I have to say though that for me vote buying still as place in #newsteem. Main point for me is that that vote buying has to come at a cost. Like the word buying does imply. And furthermore, that it is understood that buying votes for a post simply increases the likelyhood that more stakeholders will disagree with the rewards of that post towards the lower end.

20.10.2019 09:35
0

As you can see by 'my other reply', I get this often. I have nothing against 'don-t' but expecting a return from a bought vote should no longer be considered 'the thing'.

Yes. buying is still has a place, poster can always deny themselves rewards if they want to advertise and appear on Trending.

20.10.2019 11:19
1

I use mine - but find that I don't always have the time to do it before I get to 100%. Sometimes I vote down further.

17.10.2019 20:08
2

Same here.

20.10.2019 09:37
0

Nothing - I use them 😅

17.10.2019 20:09
2

I should have putten that up as an additional answer. I hope that at some point this will become the norm, but no doubt, the road is still a long way to go.

20.10.2019 09:45
0

Voted for

  • Other reasons (please explain)

I'm not a confrontational person. I think downvotes are important as a corrective to some abuses, just as I think a police force in necessary in society. But I make a terrible police officer. It would ruin Steem for me to get involved in disputes. This is irresponsible, leaving the policing to others, but each of us has to operate in our comfort zone. So I try to do other good things on the platform. I guess that's a combination of several of your options.

17.10.2019 20:10
3

Thank you for your comment.

First of all, I can relate very well with how you feel. At this stage of the adoption of #newsteem it still often is an unpleasant experience to disagree with rewards towards the lower end. And I can understand if someone decides to not get exposed to the disappointment, the dispute and sometimes the rage that gets triggered thereby. But what to do if one is convinced that the reward allocation can't be a one-way road towards higher payouts. And that the absence of disagreement towards the lower end would immediately bring back the broken economy where one could send 1 Steem to an address just to get a guaranteed 1.15 Steem back. We have been there, it wasn't viable.

Having said that, you really should continue using Steem as it feels right and enjoyable for you. We will get nowhere if Steem can't be the place for exactly that for most of it's users. In the best case, however, distributing and receiving downvotes will not be anything that will interfere with the pleasure of beeing a Steemian, but will be part of the normal experience. I can't see how it can work out without them.

20.10.2019 10:11
4

Hi Shaka
Thank you for that clear explanation. I respect the good intentions and rationale behind New Steem. Thanks for understanding my way forward here. I hope the next few months bring a resurgence in activity and renewed confidence in the platform. I'm certainly going to try and be a positive influence in my small corner of the Steem universe.

21.10.2019 00:09
1

Thank you, @shaka!

21.10.2019 16:45
1

I'd be fine with a police force.

Moderators/witnesses downvoting makes sense to me, but there should be some kind of transparent appeals process.

What we have now is VIGILANTISM.

In other words, SCHOOL-YARD-BULLIES.

29.10.2019 13:50
0

Resteemed, because I think it's a good question that affects the ecology of the platform.

17.10.2019 20:17
1

Thank you!

20.10.2019 10:15
0

Hi Shaka, an interesting concept, thanks for asking this curly question!

If people go out of their way to take the time to write a blog and post that, or they comment on another blog, we downvote? I upvote regardless of a person's stature here on Steem.

There is already too much negativity in the world. I like to remain positive and I hope by at least not downvoting, I remain neutral. I hope readers will see my upvote as a way of rewarding engagement.

When you paddle out to surf, and get ready to jump on to the best wave, then someone says "my wave get off", time to sell your board and walk away. Do we really want that disengagement here, on Steem?

Maybe we need a new Steem tribe: depressme!

17.10.2019 20:18
3

I noticed the retaliation rate is just disturbingly high here. I think this is one of the most common reasons why people don´t use their free downvotes. Some accounts are close to quitting because of the retaliatory downvotes they have been getting.

17.10.2019 20:19
3

Thank you for commenting.

You are certainly right that the fear of revenge is what keeps many Steemians from using downvotes at this point in time. You may probably agree though, that this is just a numbers game. The broader DVs are used the lower the risk of receiving them in return. Minnows and dolphins play a critical role in diluting the effect of reciprocal DVs. But yeah, it remains being difficult to ramping this up since those who start will indeed take the burden of retaliation up on them until enough others follow.

20.10.2019 10:24
1

Exactly. I totally agree with your points. I also understand, however, that people who post regularly (and thus have a lot of stuff to be targeted by potential revenge downvotes) and who rely on their Steem earnings to some extent, don´t want to get involved in downvote skirmishes as it can get them in some serious troubles.

20.10.2019 10:31
3

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.

Trending page looks pretty fine nowadays, bid bots switched to manual curation. There are way less posts that deserve to be downvoted and as I mentioned a few minutes earlier...it seems like everyone is obsessed with it lately...

17.10.2019 20:20
1

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

17.10.2019 20:21
0

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
17.10.2019 20:23
0

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.

I very rarely downvote, and if I do, I mostly downvote spam/scam and other abusive comments.

17.10.2019 20:26
0

Voted for

  • Other reasons

I try to use my downvotes only on posts that needs it. The two posts I've downvoted is mostly to punish wrong use of the introduceyourself tag. I see the downvote like a punishment : if you don't follow the rules, we'll punish you. That's also why I always comment to tell why I've downvote.

On the other side, the votes are only a reward for the best posts of steemit. That's also why I don't upvote too many posts. Or I use my upvote to help my community grow as we, cosplayers, aren't a lot active on steemit. If people see that there's cosplayer that start to gain some decent rewards, it will maybe lead to a new account.

I hope my comment will help !

17.10.2019 20:26
1

As I don’t have nazis or morons in my feed and seldom read out of my filter bubble - why would I downvote shit? 😂

Posted using Partiko iOS

17.10.2019 20:27
1

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
17.10.2019 20:32
0

Voted for

  • Disagreeing with too high rewards just isn't mine.
17.10.2019 20:37
0

It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.

I don't see the point, that i have to search for it. If there is a reason for me to downvote someone, i will do it. LGG

17.10.2019 20:38
2

While I understand the need for downvotes I simply don't want to participate. I will only downvote hate speech and blatant abuse of the reward system. I get downvotes all the time from accounts that were created after the fork and have 15 sp. It's annoying. It doesn't hurt me financially but it is just random downvotes from ghost accounts. Imagine how scary that is for new members who are trying to find their voice here to get downvoted for no reason. I have long thought, while there is a need for downvotes, that it would be abused by the community and hurt growth. Revenge flagging needs to calm down and random downvoting for no reason has to stop before I could feel comfortable being a part of that system.

17.10.2019 20:46
1

Voted for

  • I find it already difficult enough to allocate my daily quota of upvotes.
17.10.2019 20:55
0

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
17.10.2019 21:00
2

May I introduce you to this tool:
https://flags.dpoll.xyz/

;)

17.10.2019 21:50
0

lol

18.10.2019 20:41
1

Hello @shaka, this is an interesting question.

Before I answer, I want to say that the availability of free downvote is a very good thing in my opinion. even more so at the current steem condition. downvote needs to be done for those who abuse. such as copy paste on posts, and for those who continue to rape the pool of steem prizes.

before the harfock, I saw many users who raped the steem prize pool. in a day they made so many posts. and they also don't vote for others. they only vote for themselves.
of course this will make steem more hurt. and after the harfock, they were turned off and now stopped raping the prize pool.

now only 1 user remains who continues to rape the steem prize pool. he has considerable strength. until now the journey is very smooth. there hasn't been a single whale that has given him a downvote.

and now downvote is also done for users using bid bot services. I totally agree with this. Unlike before Harfock, only a few words users can place their posts on trending. in my opinion it really looks like rubbish.

In my opinion, the reason for free downvotes is to make prices better. and prevent unqualified posts from getting high marks.

however, it's a pity, now downvote is not only for those who cheat. but downvote is also used to limit the amount of payment posts. I totally disagree with this. in my opinion this is the same as taking the rights of others who have painstakingly made quality posts.

what makes me not use downvote every day?

I am happy with the availability of free downvote, and I really want to do it with cheating users. but I did not dare. The reason is because I have very little strength. for another reason, I'm afraid of revenge.

Posted using Partiko Android

17.10.2019 21:03
4

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
17.10.2019 21:11
0

Never thought downvoting is fun. I search for the positive content, bad one doesn’t interest me, and yes… I think downvoting is a fundamentally wrong idea. But let’s save it for the text about the “perfect platform”, shall we?

17.10.2019 21:12
0

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.

Downvotes allow whales to manipulate the reward system (especially in tribes) for their own benefit. These same whales also use this functionality to "bully" small accounts on a daily basis.

17.10.2019 21:21
0

I think founders and community needs to find solution to make steemit better community
Real decentralized coin
This is to much exposure to public to get a feeling that steemit is actually centralized and negatively controlled community on crypto scale.
Lets find solution together

17.10.2019 21:55
2

Thank you for commenting. I think a possible solution has been rolled out with the last HF. It remains open whether enough stakeholders will adopt the new possibilities that were given. I tagged you in a reply I made earlier in this thread. This may help explaining my general view on the topic.

21.10.2019 09:12
2

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
17.10.2019 21:56
0

My vote is basically worthless and I'm not willing to expose myself to potential retaliation over a penny flag. Also steem is a game and I'm not interested in making judgements on a lawless platform. I'm not here for the money flags aren't going to save steem from obscurity or fix the platforms well deserved bad image..

Posted using Partiko Android

17.10.2019 22:47
0

I don’t have the time to actively search for posts to downvote. If I come across one while curating to upvote I’ll do it but not seek them out for their own sake.

Posted using Partiko iOS

17.10.2019 23:53
0

Voted for

  • I find it already difficult enough to allocate my daily quota of upvotes.
    • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
    • Disagreeing with too high rewards just isn't mine.
    • Other reasons (please explain)

I already spend a lot of time on STEEM, seeking good undervalued posts to upvote and doing my own blogging. I do not have time to look at people who have high rewards already to decide if I think they are undeserved.

I have looked at some of the posts about people downvoting and see minefields of people I mostly do not know using the f word and making nasty comments to each other. I do not want to be a part of this. Who is the "good guy" and who is the "bad guy?" I do not have the knowledge to know the difference.

17.10.2019 23:55
3

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
    • Other reasons (please explain)

If someone is wrong or there is another reason, then you can tell it to him. I don't like punishment. Some have stopped because they were constantly downvoted. It hurts these people. And the wales have the most power and many are then not visible and cannot recover at all. And from acts of revenge even particularly good contributions are downvoted

18.10.2019 00:01
1

i dindt do it till now. I am not a person who is looking arround, who i can downvote.... thats not the target of beeing here for me

18.10.2019 00:17
0

I'm glad you're asking these questions @shaka

I hope you get many answers for this is something everyone should make their opinion on in the community on this platform.

I am not opposed to red flags / downvote if they are just used properly, but I believe that a warning should first be in place with a yellow flag that describes the problem of fighting spam / plagiarism and fraud.

In my 3 years at steemit I have given many a warning and explained where I do it. Several of them did not realize it was wrong and have thanked for it afterwards for guidance and some of them have also become my friends here at Steemit. It is useful to talk to people, not just give them a flag / dwonvote and then they just sit there as a question

We must be able to teach to others before we punish, so that everyone gets a chance to grow on this platform

Some of the ugliness that happens here is now revenge with flag / downvote
Small accounts are also downvote for no reason because of many other small accounts that are only active when down voting.
Am afraid someone has a different agenda than what flag / downvote is meant for. Looks like they don't want new Steemit accounts

I think all this has to be done in a more correct way, as we are now creating a huge war on the platform and more and more are becoming enemies instead of friends

My suggestion for the next Hardfork is

The use of downvote / flagging cannot come until you give a factual reason with warning. And the warnings should then come with a yellow flag
If the warnings are not heeded, it will be possible next time to give the red flag, but even then it must be described why the red flag comes.

18.10.2019 02:15
6

Voted for

  • I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.
    • I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.

I don't feel good downvoting posts. Some people might already be trying very hard to come up with a post. And to downvote that is cruel. If you don't like the post, just don't upvote it. Move up.
On the other hand, if the post was by some whale and if I were to downvote it, they might retaliate. So, it doesn't make sense to invite this kind of trouble. Same thing as before - if you don't like the post, don't upvote. Just move along.
At the end of the day, we are all different. We are all on here to mine some steem, and maybe make a like-minded friend or two. So, let us all do what we can, and let others do what they can.

18.10.2019 04:00
2

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
18.10.2019 04:01
0

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
    • I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.
18.10.2019 04:59
1

The only things I'm used to downvote are phishing links, scams (real ones not the ones people yell at when they don't like a project), identity theft (like posting the work of an artist and pretending to be that person), etc. In other words, publications made with the general aims of a con artist.

I don't know how daily free dowvotes work (how many an account gets, how the weight is calculated, if it uses SP, RC, or else) and even if I did, I don't think, I would change my DV habits

Adressing what I sense was the spirit of changing the rule, I guess I could say that I've never felt enough concern with Steem pool's tragedy of the commons. And I would bet most other small users don't either, but the higher the stakes of a Steemian gets, the higher the interest in having a healthy ecosystem.

Posted using Partiko Android

18.10.2019 05:48
1

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
18.10.2019 06:40
0

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
    • I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.
    • I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.
18.10.2019 08:18
0

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.

The purpose behind preventing inappropriately high payouts is understandable, but those who have used this dubious system (Bit Bots) on a large scale are now also large players on the Steem.
I think that the downvote behaviour of many steemians since HF21 has shown that it is especially used for revenge and unfounded purposes.
There are certainly other ways of keeping posts under control, which used Posts exploitively or for extremist opinion-forming.

The Free Downvotes are a power retention system for those who have made it this far to belong to the big ones.

Small accounts cannot use downvotes without the danger of completely destroying their own account.
One should find a positive solution where perhaps quality of the post is separately evaluated and thus a weighting of the monetary votes is made.

So, my suggestion would be to introduce 2 ways to vote, one to rate the quality (depending on the length of the text it should be usable only after a certain time) and one to present the monetary support.

If no evaluation of the quality is made (not read) the quality is weighted with the minimum and thus the payout is reduced.

18.10.2019 09:45
2

Hi @siphon

Thank you for your comment. I'm a bit overwhelmed by the number of thoughtful responses to this post and I'm not able to catch up with adequate replies to each of them. To explain my view on the matter I thus need to refer to the replies which I made earlier in this thread.

Thank you!

Thanks!

21.10.2019 09:22
2

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
18.10.2019 10:27
0

Voted for

  • Other reasons (please explain)

because I thought before I tested it would not hurt the ones who need to get some, and I´m totaly right with this. At the moment there are huge accounts on their way to justify whith their SP-power but not with reasonable arguments, and as a small steemian not me and not my company account is able to hurt this silly guys with my downvotes. So the only usage for me seems to be that I risk the payouts of all my curators when I try to downvote them, and therefor its totally equal if the downvotes are free or not they will not solve the problem behind the family and friends games.

its verry poor times here at the moment !

18.10.2019 11:08
2

I've chosen:

  • Other reasons

I'm not using none of my daily 2.5 free downvotes. Because I'm already pretty old to keep pretending try to correct the world and sweep all its inexhaustible shit inside a massive black hole light years away at the borderline of other dimensions.

In my surfeited binnacle, it is already written that those ideals are now just left for the SJW youngsters who dunno anything better.

SJW.jpg

Yep! I am so old that I even didn't bother to cast my vote in Dpoll. LoL

18.10.2019 11:26
1

Voted for

  • I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.

My downvote can't compete against whales or bid bots but I will be wiped out in return.

18.10.2019 12:06
0

Voted for

  • I find it already difficult enough to allocate my daily quota of upvotes.
    • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.

Hello @shaka :)

This is an interesting discussion to have. It's nice to have the opportunity to talk about downvotes and read the position of others here on your comment feed.

I could address each of the points you raised, but I decided to go for a brief (er) reply, elaborating only on those aspects I find more relevant for me.

I find it already difficult enough to allocate my daily quota of upvotes.

When spending time on the platform, I prefer to encourage those community members who enjoy blogging and are dedicated to what they do here, than to punish those who don't. I suppose it's because it's also beneficial for me. For example, I get to read interesting write-ups, learn new things, get to see cool artworks and so forth.

Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.

I don't think downvotes are fundamentally wrong. But, free-downvotes are. Punishment that comes with no cost to the 'punisher' paves the way for vindictive behaviour. If a group puts a punishment system in place, it must be one that comes with a cost to that who punishes (especially on a community like Steemit). Than, it is more likely that it will be carried out for the greater good of the group (altruistic punishment), than just as a mere act of vengeance.

18.10.2019 13:16
5

Hi Abigail,

thank you for joining the poll and for sharing your take on the matter.

Your judgement on allowing free downvotes appears logical under your premise that they are an instrument of punishment. My understanding of downvotes, however, is fundamentally different. Let me try to explain.

Downvotes express the request of a stakeholder to correct the current proposal for the reward of a contribution. Just like an upvote does. When someone hits the publish button on Steem, the community of stakeholders is called to review and modify a constantly changing proposal for the reward of that post. This review goes on over a period of 7 days and it deals with nothing else but a proposal. There is nothing to give, nothing to take, nothing to reward, nothing to punish. It’s just collecting stake-weighted input to come up with a final consensus on what the actual payout should be. No one should feel entitled to receive what a proposal suggests at any time within this 7d period. Because it’s subject to change until it’s final.

Now, to engage in this review stakeholders have only three possibilities to express their view. Upvote, Downvote and No vote. And now I get to the point. What happens to this review if one expression comes at a cost while another doesn’t? In other words, how will the outcome of this review change if one as to pay for saying „less“ while getting payed for saying „more“. No way this could work out. And we were all able to convince ourselves for a long time that it didn’t.

Even now after the introduction of the EIP these three ways to engage in the reward proposal review are incentivized differently, since only one of them offers curation rewards. Still, taking away at least the penalty on the downvote has gone a long way towards improving reward evaluation and thus content discovery.

Reintroducing a cost on downvotes will again take them out of the set of expressions we have in said review and would turn our shared community pool back into the self-service shop it was for a too long time.

Needless to say that the above is all my personal take on the matter. Thanks again for sharing yours.

(I take the liberty of tagging a few of the other commenters here, since what I wrote here might be an adequate response to their input too.
@don-t @roleerob @xpilar @ianballantine @flysky @siphon @wulff-media @purplealyss @cflclosers @lighteye @gamemods @suntree @agmoore @gunnarheilmann)

21.10.2019 08:22
5

Good afternoon @shaka,

Thank you for taking the time to share your views here with me/us :) I found it very insightful and it has definitely provided me with a different angle from which to approach this topic.

Best,
Abigail.

21.10.2019 14:59
1

Hello Shaka,

in order to achieve equanimity, i.e. that someone becomes more indifferent to payouts, you suggest to change the view on it. I understand that.

You probably observed, that the average human psyche seems unable to take on this view (count me in as "average").

In order to achieve the coolness about the appearing sum under a running post it would be helpful to make the process behind it invisible. I know, this is not possible and also not the concept and technical framework of Steemit. But bear with me.

Some questions:

  • Would it be less exciting/stressful for the content producer if there would be no information in the seven-day window about the amount and other quantities of the (current) payout?
  • Would he be more relaxed if only after the time has elapsed he gets to know the total amount of the payout?
  • Would you agree, that as soon as you make the sum appear, you make it experienceable on an emotional level?

The equanimity - how I call it - represents actually for me a highly developed mature mentality.

In having the given Steemit concept, framework and visibility, I encounter conflicts. What matters now is whether I welcome conflicts. As a rule, only people who have the firm intention of learning something from conflicts in order to get along peacefully with themselves and, subsequently, with others, welcome them. If you don't want the conflict, you may engage a while in debate but actually want everything function fluently without having debates/conflicts.

The best way in avoiding conflicts are from my experience either a.) working on a maturation of mentality or b.):

  • binding contracts between content creator and a paying audience (not "rewarding" as it is often called here. Rewards are attached to emotions). --> not possible
  • binding contract between content creator and a central organ of this Internet platform (Steemit Inc. and authors) --> doesn't happen here
  • binding contracts (or at least predictable quality control on a professional basis and predictable payouts) between community drivers and authors who apply and agree on certain rules which the community driver explicitly gives out (and I wouldn't call it "community" but rather an "editing service" or "publishing-office").
  • or both, a and b.

I don't know of any comparable function like the one on Steemit, where the whole process from second 1 to the end of the 7-day window is documented so detailed. Although it seems that there is no lack of information, the process of "I post content" and "I receive reactions" is highly disturbed, maybe by too much information.

If the claim is there that such things should remain undisturbed until the end, then the visibility of the process taking place in the meantime causes a problem.

... Unlike a writer who doesn't know how many readers he'll have and how often his book will be sold until his book has been written, edited and published.

Readers who have bought the book can say from page three or a three-hundred that the book is bad, but they cannot reduce the author's royalty on selling the book. Any content that is viewed has for some time claimed the reader's attention, otherwise he wouldn't have read anything.

Between certainty and uncertainty lies a distance. If I don't want to see this stretch thematized, I don't give it a chance. But if I create the possibility, I build in a source of disturbance and conflict.

... Even a highly qualified monk who is working to let go of his ego will not want to move in an environment where the path to his spiritual supporters seems to be cut off and he assumes to be in a predominantly hostile environment. He will therefore want to leave this environment. When one realizes that one cannot change things, it is wise to make this effort only where the framework and will is there. ... But then engagement must be high, stable, continuing and authentic - you gotta have a reliable and ever present executive force.

Everything that cannot be changed cannot be forced. From what I know about life so far is, that you cannot change the mindset of others, only of yourself.

The 7-day window creates a fine potential for conflict, because if it did not exist and you could still vote for content for weeks, months or years later, an uncertainty factor would be built in that basically corresponds to that of the book author. I just point it out (as this is not the concept of Steemit) for contemplating about "uncertainty".

"Accept that you receive downvotes just as you accept upvotes". This seems to be logical at first, but would require, as mentioned, a very mature mentality. In the case where someone is indifferent to "joy" and "pain," he is called "enlightened," for example, in Buddhism. For he neither attaches too much importance to pain (down-votes) nor to pleasure (up-votes).

Such a person is highly unlikely to be found on a Steemit. It's more a room where the ego seeks pleasure or pain. If it doesn't find pleasure, it likes to find pain alternatively, because it prefers strong feelings. It doesn't want to be neutral, because neutrality doesn't provide a strong (enough) emotion.

To find a funny note about it, I'd say Steemit can represent a concept for getting to know oneself :)

As much as I can understand your position, I am sceptic about it to come true here.

22.10.2019 18:16
1

Hi Erika

Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

I share your scepticism about achieving equanimity when it comes to dealing with up- versus downvotes, both in terms of taking and distributing.

I described an admittedly idealized approach to how to deal with disagreement on shared resource allocation. We won't be able to get there, but I would nevertheless argue for trying to move our sentiment at least towards it (if that is possible at all).

Now the way how the allocation of our shared inflation is formally implemented already implies the notion of something good versus something bad. Like already the wording up- versus downvote, the visual of an arrow pointing up versus an arrow pointing down or a heart versus a broken heart like on Steempeak. Such a framing is obviously counterproductive in supporting the adoption of a less emotional handling. Frontends could do a lot to at least mitigate the barriers given by the conditioning of the human psyche.

Not to show the current rewards for a post until it's payed out is a comprehensible proposal, but it is fundamentally incompatible with how reward allocation works on Steem. The proposed reward must be transparent at all times, otherwise stakeholders wouldn't be able to agree or disagree at any point in time.

Your analysis is sound to me overall. The challenge is that we find ways to help dealing with an unprecedented logic for sharing something that is loaded with emotions ever since - a monetary resources. A logic wich represents a challenge for the human mind to deal with but at the same time a tremendous opportunity to empower people in the digital age, all over the world.

Thanks for enriching this thread!

23.10.2019 08:38
2

Thanks for giving your feedback. I very much favor to change the symbols or the given habits/ergonomics in how displays and buttons function. It triggers the creative me. It could be worked on unusual ideas and designs.

Apart from that I would like to stretch one of your answers a little further.

The proposed reward must be transparent at all times, otherwise stakeholders wouldn't be able to agree or disagree at any point in time.

For me, this agreement or disagreement points right at the "abuse" issue.

To understand why there is a fight against abuse at all, one is directed towards the reward pool. Before it is clear what is actually being abused, one would have to assume the following premise:

The reward pool is emptied at some point.
This, I was told, is not possible. Others say, however, it is (almost) possible. Let me leave the details aside and say for the thought experiment:

a.) it is (almost) possible.
The question arises "why do people enrich themselves unjustified?" accompanied by a strong control willingness of those enriching and of those watching them (but Achtung: people switch between roles).

One can also look at it that way: Whoever actively enriches himself from a reward pot through helpers helper (I spare to name the usual) seems to be a very needy person. Those who think that their contents deserve exactly what they themselves decide to acquire apparently have an inner lack. There are psychological reasons why one tries to nourish this lack. Who jumps at this behaviour and says "unfair!" can ask himself why he is doing it. Mostly there are - rather hidden or repressed - assumptions about the world, it is envy, own not admitted neediness etc.

Logic says that if someone else takes more, I automatically have less. Indeed, it is so. But is it so dramatic that I have "less"? How much do I personally need for my well-being? Is it imperative to judge others or teach them better behaviour? I could think: Yes. Then the question would be: How?

Here we come into an area that lets us mix emotions, facts and incorrect causalities. Plus the direct confrontation with the enriching. To take from one something that he has taken before. In fact, however, he won't want to let it be taken away, because he has a very deep conviction that he has a right to the "more".

An effective way to bring an active abuser to insight is to refrain from having to bring him to insight.

The environment can only always behave "differently". If it behaves "the same", it agrees with the abuse, because it is believed that one must control behavior. The abuser registers this willingness to control and it confirms that he himself (also) has to control what he and others deserve.

The "different", is equanimity towards the active enricher and a clearly visible living form of cooperation and expression of ethical consensus.

Only when a needy person can realize that his need for enrichment is not practiced by others may he realize that he is seeking to compensate for a lack and can, with time, get rid of his neediness. The "other" is never the "same", but the abuser sees in the struggle against him "the same" and therefore he won't change except perhaps "give up" or "leave". Thereby his lack does not heal, he is then only relocated somewhere else.

If, however, he is permanently disturbed in the process - the realization and observation of an"other possibility" - and if, in his perception, he is primarily dominated by controlling persons and intentions, he will continue to classify his needy behavior as correct and continue to engage in abuse, since, in his perception, all others also do so.

In a way, he is right about this impression, just as everyone else is right when they focus on certain "these" events, but not on certain "other" events. This, however, is always an excerpt of the world determined by the one who wants to see or not see something.

b.) The pot will be empty
Equanimity would say: I don't need to control others because I know that self-control is the best control. The equanimity takes the risk that it may be that the pool will be emptied one day. By being willing to take such a risk calmly, it has become something else: Not a risk, but another possibility of reality.

If equanimity dominates a system it would "accidentally" provide for a never emptying pot. By not "caring" for the pot, the pot will be well filled.

By completely giving up on being dependent on a reward pool, a person gives up control over other people.
Let's just assume for a moment that this willingness to give up control over other people would be practiced.

I like this thought very much.

c.) the pot won't be empty because of description in b.)

I agree, it is a challenge and I am not at all certain if the "digital age" and "social media" are the best teaching environments as people use them strong and fast. Not slow and deep.

But of course, a teaching could be found in everything... also here.

Have a great day, dear Shaka.

24.10.2019 15:18
2

Thank you @shaka for this explanation of your thoughts about this issue, I mostly agree with you, but as long as bots and voting-trails do this jobs (it doesn´t matter if in positive or negative way) it is unacceptable because it also leads to abuse.
This has happened in the last few weeks.

It can't be that it's allowed to automate something like this, especially if the accounts with the most power are trying to play the regulators on both sides.

This clearly shows again the biggest system error on Steemit, the missing balance between 1Mio SP and 10, 100 or 1000SP.

Even if I take your example from our conversation where it was said that many small accounts together also reach an respectable SP, so I must admit with a little distance that exactly the same is true for the large accounts so the mismatch can be very easily restored.

There would have to be a ban which limits e.g. a delegation basically to a maximum of 100K SP, so that these pool formations would be extremely difficult to establish and thus the abuse almost excluded completely in contrast to the current state.

It is bad enough if an account with a SP power of more than 500k or 1 Mio decides to vote a contribution down because he does not like it or he thinks it would be overvalued, this can not be corrected, there is no regulative for it.
So in order to make this community one under equal, a few rules should be changed in the interest of all.

And only then steemit and steem might finally be able to raise and play out their enormous potential, also for the benefit of all members of this incredible community.

Guess that´s the goal to fight for, nothing else is worth it isn´t it ?

22.10.2019 21:37
2

flag wars that start after that is brutal !

18.10.2019 13:36
0

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.

!BEER
for you

18.10.2019 13:45
1

View or trade BEER.

Hey @shaka, here is a little bit of BEER for you. Enjoy it!

18.10.2019 13:45
0

I recently joined @pharesims downvote trail (@curangel), so I now use my free downvotes. Retaliations have so far been quite minor (a few cent here and there).

18.10.2019 13:58
1

In the past weeks i do see more and more down votes. They do feel more like trolling randomly.


This is what i think
As i see in my case the down vote is like a Police giving you a ticket for something you dont understand. If it does not come with a correlated explaination or reason its useless. I see a few down votes on my content and look at the profile behind it. When you follow that trail then you'll see these profiles are new or barly used and have most of the time no content or anything going. So that explains nothing of why the down vote. Or does that "person" even have a 'taste' or a proper 'opinion'. Not even considering having the knowledge about (in my case) photography to be taken serious. Because YES i do want constructive critisim, but from a person who understands that/my topic. This is where the comment comes in handy. Comment and tell people "its a useless blog post" or something like that. So thats where you end up in the next round of negative energy. The endless cycle of trolling starts.

Do you really need the downvote ? In general i say just stay away from bad content. When yo see it ignore it.
Although, I do see one great way of using the down vote; people that start trolling and havig an opinion they clearly have no grounds to raise one in the first place, thats where i see it.


Down vote trolling! Down vote Bullies!

18.10.2019 14:07
0

Voted for

  • I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.
    • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
18.10.2019 14:40
3

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
18.10.2019 15:21
0

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.

It's hard to find posts that are stolen unless you find posts with that default message from Cheeta/Steemcleaners.

18.10.2019 17:51
0

Voted for

  • Other reasons (please explain)
18.10.2019 20:46
0

Voted for

  • I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.
    • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
19.10.2019 05:11
2

Voted for

  • I find it already difficult enough to allocate my daily quota of upvotes.
    • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
    • I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.
    • Other reasons (please explain)

I've proved myself wrong already when I wanted to downvote but commented first and then understood what has not been going on with the massive upvote that has been given already.

19.10.2019 15:40
0

Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
Usually i don't like to be an asshole and downvotes might be a good reason why steemit is slowly dying, people had enough of these SJW's telling them what to post and what not. steemit can be worse than school in my opinion ;)
please don't take this personal please it's not against you, it's just my opinion. i already know some will take this personal^^

19.10.2019 23:06
0

I should have used one on your post here, which is (at the time of my looking at it) totally overvalued already. However, who am I to piss on 270+ people who have decided that your posts is worth something to them. So here is your answer: I reject downvotes on principle, because they spread nothing but negativity. If I don't like something I move on and upvote something else. Live and let live.

If by some miracle I should get a share of those 5 SBD for my "great insight" I ask you to donate it to whichever charity you deem worthy. Perhaps as a last hoorah to @nosdos which was ruined by the currend downvote culture...

20.10.2019 06:45
9

Hi Folker

Thanks for showing up and commenting!

If you consider this post to be overvalued I'd like to encourage you to downvote it accordingly. And don't assess longer as you usually do before you upvote a post wich you consider undervalued. I would take your downvote as nothing else but another stakeholder exerting his influence on how to allocate from our shared reward pool. Steem won't have a sustainable economy if there isn't a sufficient number of stakeholders who assume their ownership of the Steem inflation and actively manage its distribution based on their subjective judgement. Having the possibility to counter the assessment made by others is inevitable to make all of this work, no matter how many stakeholders came to an assessment different from yours. If you just move on to upvote another post it means that you limit your influence to distribute what others left for you to distribute.

If you are interested you can read more about my view on downvotes in my reply to Abigail. I took the liberty to tag you there.

21.10.2019 08:31
1

If you consider this post to be overvalued

I consider it overvalued, not worthless. So I gave you a token +1%, if I remember correctly. A recent post of @therealwolf I had found vastly overvalued and abusive to boot, so he got -100% including an explanatory comment. I understand how it works. BTW, he told me to get a life or something and proceeded to mute my comment into oblivion, like I was any old troll. Win some, lose some...

I would take your downvote as nothing else

I know that and trust it. In fact, I honestly believe that many "old" Steemians would see it exactly the same way, a few assholes notwithstanding. To me, the revenge downvotes per se are not the big problem, but I reject downvoting on principle as I don't like negativity.

If I don't upvote a post it's a judgement on my part that said post is worthless to me and only to me. I don't feel I have a right to take away from those who upvoted the post, i.e. they found it valuable to them. I consider the logic behind downvoting re. shared pool, sustainability, re-allocation, etc. utterly flawed. If it were such a good thing it would be self evident and didn't have to be defended tooth and nails by those who advocate it.

Example: If I see a beggar in the street I don't give them any money. Here in Germany, this person only needs to go to the welfare office and will be helped generously, probably that very day. So I don't attribute any social value to this person's begging and have better ideas how the money in their hat should be used. However, I don't punch them in the face, tell them what worthless human trash they are, and proceed to steal their hat with the cash to "reallocate" it. THIS IS EXACTLY HOW I FEEL ABOUT DOWNVOTES. (Not the nuissance-troll-asshole ones, those are best ignored.)

An aside: I'm not that heartless. I DO give money to street musicians because I appreciate their performance (upvote!) and to beggars with dogs, because they have a hard time getting help in homeless shelters or finding social housing with the animal. (Hence the passion re. @nosdos.) Anyway, different subject...

Steem won't have a sustainable economy

If Steem is not sustainable without downvotes maybe there shouldn't be a Steem. (Cases of outright plagiarism, reward pool rape, etc. notwithstanding.) That greed is a problem is also well established. Funny, the greedy ones often are the biggest downvote advocates... I feel that sustainability could be reached if we came to a culture where upvotes, especially big ones, aren't given so easily and downvotes the weapon of last resort to combat outright abuse.

I understand the sustainability issue somewhat, thanks to @penguinpablo (the data guy) who was nice enough to explain it to me. Maybe I'm wrong, but we don't need to rehash that stuff. I don't like the current culture here, and I'm on my way out because #newsteem took away the "visibility on demand" that was valuable to me, without providing an adequate replacement.

21.10.2019 17:17
3

@wulff-media Some accounts with high SP seem to exist only to use their power to heavily downvote those they hate (for whatever reason) - and one (or more, like maybe same guy with several accounts) I am aware of seems to be a stalking troll who does not post himself at all, but just uses his big SP to downvote. Giving haters (that can afford to invest large amounts in Steem) that much power without any kind of checks and balances can also damage this platform.

The incidences of heavy weighted downvotes I am aware of are seemingly politically (and perhaps also racist) motivated actions by one (or more?) ultra-right-wing actors.

25.10.2019 00:41
1

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
    • Other reasons (please explain)

I will elaborate on my vote in comments on your post.

Well ... Great, I did not know how dpoll works obviously. I have written my comment further down ...

sbi-skip

20.10.2019 13:51
1

Reading through this post and the comments being generated @shaka, I was inspired to take the time to vote on your poll and write my own. For what it is worth …

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.

Investment of my time is of primary importance to me. And “getting it right” on something as important as downvoting is almost time prohibitive. If I believed in it more firmly than I do currently, I could probably find some time. To downvote at least sometimes, but so far I have chosen not to do it. And, as a matter of time efficiency, I am aware there is always the option of downvoting trails. But … I am of the opinion, that if you are going to “do it right,” then you should be “man enough” to leave a comment as to why you are downvoting. I neither fully trust the person(s) “behind the curtain” on these downvoting trails, nor would there be a comment left …

The results of your poll, at the time of my voting, is shown above. In 3rd place was “other reasons,” which I also selected:

  • Other reasons (please explain).

Both anticipating (and not particularly favorably either …) the pending EIP changes launched in HF 21 / 22 and then watching them unfold over the last several weeks, I have not been particularly impressed with the way the use of downvotes has “played out.” At least not up to this point. Yes, I agree there have been some indications of some improvement. But … At what price? And with what “unintended consequences?”

I can distill a much longer dialogue down to just a simple reference to human nature. And whether or not the use of this particular EIP feature appeals to our uhhh … “lighter” side vs. our “darker” side. For this Steemian, I would definitely ”tilt’ my impressions, of the impact thus far, more to the latter …

An old saying …

”You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette …”

… may be humorous to some, but in “real life?” I don’t find it amusing. I have seen too many accounts that are being badly hurt and far fewer still actively involved, since the implementation of HF 21 / 22. At least in the “circles” in which I have been engaged for my nearly 1-½ year “journey” on our Steem blockchain …

Okay, that’s probably more than enough out of me. Judging by the stake you have, your “voice” would be heard more “loudly” than those of us smaller accounts. I will be interested to know what you choose to do, with the results of your poll, to express an opinion on how to make our Steem blockchain better. For all of us …


P.S. Yes, a little “late,” but “dropping by” after finding you were kind enough to vote for a comment I made. Not very common these days … So … I was not familiar with your account and, in checking out your blog, found this one to be of interest! 😉

sbi skip

20.10.2019 14:24
1

Hi @roleerob

Thank you for your extensive comment. I'm a bit overwhelmed by the amount of thoughtful responses and will thus reply with only some short remarks. However, to understand where I'm coming from I would recommend to first go through the responses which I shared with others earlier in this thread.

And “getting it right” on something as important as downvoting is almost time prohibitive

A downvote is a stakeholder's request to correct the current proposal for the reward of a given post. To "get it right" should be as easy (or difficult) as placing an upvote is.

then you should be “man enough” to leave a comment as to why you are downvoting.

Nobody feels obliged to comment as to why they upvote. Downvotes as well as upvotes express disagreement with the current reward proposal for a post and should be considered self-explanatory if uncommented.

I neither fully trust the person(s) “behind the curtain” on these downvoting trails

That's good! Ideally all stakeholders would make use of their influence solely based on their own subjective judgement.

I have not been particularly impressed with the way the use of downvotes has “played out.”

I see major improvements.

Thanks again for joining in!

21.10.2019 09:08
0

Thank you for investing your time in your response @shaka. I am not accustomed to that …

So, we are in disagreement. But to what extent? I don’t know for certain, as you have elected to ignore the central point of what I was attempting to communicate. Whether intentionally or not, I would have no way of knowing …

So, as succinctly as I can manage a response, I have no problem with your statement of the theoretical / ideal description of the purpose of a downvote. Key word here, for me, is ideal. The central point I was attempting to communicate, however, was on taking a hard look at what is actually happening, in response to the HF 21 / 22 EIP changes. Based upon human nature …

Assuming this is sufficiently clear, I won’t invest any more of my time in elaborating, unless you have some question(s).

I’ll close with reinforcing I see some improvement to the reward pool distribution, in response to the HF 21 / 22 EIP changes. But the cost has been greater and the unintended consequences more significant than most of those of our fellow Steemians writing in support of it seem willing to acknowledge.

sbi-skip

21.10.2019 14:56
1

Good morning 🌄 (here) @shaka. Catching up a bit this morning, I was pleasantly surprised to see I had won an SBI prize from you. Again, unexpected. But welcome and I thank you for sending it.

While we both have different perspectives, Clemens, we can agree on one thing for sure. We both hope to see the value of the Steem blockchain increase. Until “next time” (perhaps), all the best to you and yours for a better tomorrow!

sbi-skip

22.10.2019 14:13
1

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
20.10.2019 16:11
0

edit: I erased this comment of mine on the total. I re-considered that you probably know most of what I have mentioned and I would like to comment on something you replied to another one in this section. As nobody so far reacted to my answer or voted for it, no harm is done.

I will do that probably later in the day.

21.10.2019 08:56
0

I only use them on a certain tribe here. On Steem not really, why not? My downvote on posts I feel that deserve a flag would not really change anything on the payout anyway - hence useless. As long as you are not a whale no need to do it apart you are into revenge flag wars, that could be fun then. Just my opinion.

21.10.2019 09:17
0

Waaaaas, schon wiedee nen Downvote, diesmal 100%, oh Mann😳 Ich möchte von den Votes ja bald leben können😂😂😂

21.10.2019 11:43
1

Also ganz ohne Ironie wünsche ich uns allen, dass Dein Stake gross genug ist, um irgendwann einmal davon leben zu können. So unwahrscheinlich ist das vielleicht gar nicht, aber wohl kaum mit Hilfe Deiner Posting-Rewards, sondern viel eher durch einen entsprechenden Kursanstieg des Steems.

Und dem Steempreis wäre es meiner Ansicht nach zuträglicher, wenn 100 User für ihre Einzelbildposts regelmässig 8 ct einfahren, statt ein Einzelner das 100fache...Das wäre zumindest meine These. Wie siehst Du das?

Grüsse,
Shaka

21.10.2019 13:34
1

Da geb ich dir vollkommen Recht, aber ein bischen Ironie muss schon sein, oder?

Ich hab auch gar kein Problem, dass du mich downvotes! Aber ein bisschen muss ich dich halt schon kitzeln😉

Und mit den 100 Usern bin ich auch bei dir!

Lg Tom

Ps: Wünsche dir noch einen schönen Tag, bis zum nächsten Downvote🤗

21.10.2019 14:08
1

Voted for

  • Other reasons (please explain)

@shaka, Don't know the exact reason because i have to find one. But let's see may be in future i will start when i will find the perfect reason. Stay blessed.

21.10.2019 14:02
0

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
21.10.2019 17:31
0

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
21.10.2019 19:09
0

Voted for

  • Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
22.10.2019 06:21
0

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
    • I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.
22.10.2019 07:59
0

... It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate ... this is almost an answer ... because is no so much matter of time ... is more a difficulty to decide that something deserves a downvote ... even if I see something that is overrated in my opinion, then at the second look, I start to think that if somebody really likes this kind of stuff - well, let it be ... the only posts I will gladly and with no problem downvote are the ones with clear plagiarism ... but I didn't come across one of those yet ... and I have a bit a problem of time in general, there is always something to do and I don't explore contents of Steemit as I would like to because I'm obsessed with daily posting, so there is not much time left to explore other people's work ... maybe in winter that will be possible ... if it will be a winter this year :) for now, it is just a strange extended summer with shorter days ...

22.10.2019 08:29
1

Wenn es wirklich was downzuvoten gibt dann bin ich dabei und habe auch schon wie gestern das letzte mal geschehen.
Resteemed :-)

23.10.2019 12:39
1

Voted for

  • It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
24.10.2019 19:48
0

Voted for

  • I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.
    • I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.
24.10.2019 23:20
0

I don't downvote for the exact same reasons I don't go around taking money out of other people's TIP-JARS.

Some people think I don't deserve upvotes.

I think some other people don't deserve upvotes.

In the exact same way,

Some people think my business doesn't deserve money.

I think some other businesses don't deserve money.

But that doesn't mean I can walk into their store and take money out of the register and redistribute (via reward-pool) it to other businesses.

29.10.2019 13:47
1