Your Comments On The Cancel Culture And Zeroing of Viral Posts on Hive By Curangel.

My two recent posts on cancel culture and downvoting on the Hive blockchain started to go 'viral' - or as viral as posts tend to go on Hive. That was until they themselves were also downvoted to zero and removed from trending and thus wide circulation. This is an important subject on any social media platform but especially one sold as being uncensored. Some of the issues here could affect anyone posting to Hive so they are relevant to most of us. Thankfully, the downvoting didn't totally stop the engagement on my previous posts, so here's a summary of your comments on the topic.

In summary, I have been posting fairly regularly on COVID19 science and news stories for a few weeks and often reaching the main trending page. Then my posts were consistently zeroed for over a week and the only explanation given was that I 'don't understand science' by pharesim at curangel. The gist of their unsubstantiated claim is that my posts endanger people somehow, yet no evidence was provided to prove this claim. In fact, all involved have done everything possible to avoid commenting and to prove anything at all. This is not how science works and it's not how social spaces nurture harmony and growth either.

While they claim that my posts somehow pose a threat to people and that they are essentially superhero curators saving the world from dangerous misinformation, the reality is that there is far more evidence that their downvoting is harming Hive than there is that my posts are harming anyone at all.

Claim #1: My Posts Are Junk That No-one Wants To Read

The two posts I have made previously on the topic of my recent post zeroing and downvoting have both totalled a number of comments that is higher than the current top 8 posts that are trending on Hive COMBINED. Some of the comments are from the original post's author (me) and some are spam, but this is true for all posts on Hive.

So it is clear that the argument that my posts should be downvoted because they get upvoted but don't generate engagement is not substantiated by the facts. If my posts are justified as being downvote-able due to low levels of commenting then so too are the top 8 posts on the Hive trending list currently, which includes a 2 day old post for Hivefest by @roelandp, which would usually be the most commented posts on Hive for months.

Here are some quotes from your comments under my posts:

I'm here and read and benefit from your posts. I don't have you on an autovoter.

@mattclarke

I autovote your posts. I also read a lot of them with interest and have been doing so for a while. I'll continue to do so.

@barge

I greatly appreciate the way you reference everything well, the amount of information you share, and how much you have supported the Steem/Hive community for so long!

@tribesteemup

I read your posts regularly and upvote them manually... You've always been fair and openminded and I personally feel you bring value to Hive and the community as a whole.

@v4vapid

To be honest: I do have you on (one) auto-vote (a day) but I also actively read your posts, especially the ones who are covid related. Appreciate them very much.

@smasssh

I do not auto vote, and all my votes (and reblogs) of your posts are manually performed by me, because I support your work! This can be easily seen in that I do not vote all your posts :) But I am active, as can also be seen by regular content I put out...

@jasonliberty

So it is clear that a substantial number of the upvoters on my posts are not only manual but very appreciative of reading what I share. I also regularly get messages and follows from Doctors and researchers around the world who aren't on Hive, who value the straight talk I provide regarding the obfuscation of data that is routinely happening by captured mainstream media sources and government regulatory bodies.

In truth, not a single shred of evidence has been provided during this process (and also while I was posting about COVID19 regularly) that disproves pretty much anything I've written. The information I share has the potential to SAVE LIVES. I am more than ready to debate this with anyone, the data I have shared backs up what I am saying and it is a view shared by a long list of Doctors, Pathologists and even the inventor of mRNA vaccine technology, Dr. Robert Malone - who I speak with to a limited extent and who now posts on Hive (3speak) too.

Claim #2: Excessive Autovoting

Another of the justifications given for large downvotes of my posts (and of some others) has been that we receive 'too many' autovotes that convey substantial rewards. This is a bit of an odd claim for a few reasons, not least that no-one really knows whether every vote is manual or not.

It is also fair to say that autovoting simply allows people to go about their daily lives, having trusted their stake's curation power to people who create the content that they like. I myself donate monthly to James Corbett, for example, because I like his content and also to a couple of others on Patreon. Autovoting is both a smart way to support creators regularly and also to ensure that your potential curation rewards are not wasted due to you not being able to spend several hours a day curating manually.

Hive Block Chain, whether people want to see it or not, is an investment tool for many many people. No one wants to baby sit their investment for 8 hours a day. So they use tools to do that auto up votes are one of them.

@BaShadow - Comment under my recent post

Many others with substantial stake commented too, explaining that they either manually curate all their upvotes or if they do autovote they also read most/all of the posts too.

The truth of the matter is that HIVE mostly does work based on voting trails. Legit stakeholders follow or stake these accounts based on their personal preferences or the type of content they'd like to see rewarded. Stakeholders that contribute to or follow voting trails are content with the curation that occurs. If they weren't, they'd pull up stakes and find other places to invest their delegations.

Not everyone wants to engage in full-time curation, but good HIVE-folk desire to contribute to the growth of the social dApp, the dApp that started it all and made this place initially an enjoyable place to create and share.

Inverted and negative curation is abstract to the real-world marketplace. It's on a par with Antifa window breaking. You're not hurting the big businesses and corporations, you are damaging the little guy, and you're doing it for what exactly? This kind of behavior is the most entitled behavior on the blockchain that I've ever seen.

@thoughts-in-time

Clearly some people take particular issue with the excessive downvoting, particularly in the context of claiming that the downvotes are issued due to excessive autovoting!

In summary, I think that using autovoting as an excuse to downvote is a shockingly dishonest approach that takes Hive users to be fools and insults investors who simply don't have the time to sit manually curating all day long. Whether this is being done to try to posture and power grab more tokens for the manual curation organisations or whether it is for other reasons that has nothing to do with Hive - I am not clear. What is clearly true, though, is that it is hypocritical to say that you are looking out for investors by downvoting the results of other investor's upvotes! There has to be some kind of middle ground involved here.

On the one hand, as I said to Acidyo, I agree that it is possible for unattended autovoting to do harm to Hive - as has possibly occurred with the large witness votes that have held the top 20 witness spots mostly stagnant for so long (the witness votes don't expire, so old users from Steem who may never have ever even logged in to Hive are still holding witness ranks in a stuck order). Auto curating is also not totally optimal, but it is a lot better than a culture where stake is centralised and then used to nullify the actions of hundreds of people based on the opinion of one person that isn't even explained fully!

Auto curation is akin to subscribing to content on Patreon or similar services, it has been part of Steem/Hive since early on and is not likely to be going away any time soon. Arbitrarily using it as an excuse to downvote is not going to win anyone any support or friends and is either a militant and ill thought out position or is malicious in intent.

Claim #3: Posts exposing the mainstream COVID19 narrative are 'dangerous'

As many people pointed out, this is likely the main reason for the downvoting - despite claims to the contrary. Virology and this COVID19 situation are complicated and so people hold wildly different perspectives of what is going on. I have studied all of the aspects to what is transpiring now for nearly 2 decades in close detail - including vaccines, pharmaceutical companies, the associated political control connected to them and numerous other related topics. I have watched many thousands of hours of video testimony from whistleblowers, documentaries, commentaries and also probably read hundreds of scientific studies.

I know for sure that it is not possible to understand the situation without having done something like this and few people have - so I am not surprised that I am caught in the crossfire of conversation on an international tragedy.

The complexity and detail of this topic means that I really can't explain my position on this in this post. The complexity is why I have been posting so many posts over the past few weeks - there is a lot to learn and new information emerges constantly.

I put together a summary post that contains a long list of links for my articles on this topic here.

For reference, here's a brand new statement from a US state Surgeon General, literally stating that you have been lied to about the safety and efficacy of the COVID19 shots:

So WHO exactly is killing people here? Is it the pharma cronies and government stooges that are so well known to be easily bought off and controlled? Is it specifically, Pfizer, who have received one of the world's largest fines previously for scientific fraud and misleading people over safety of their products? Is it me, who is mostly just amplifying whistleblowers and quoting official government data to highlight what appears to be lies coming from the corporate controlled science and media industries? Or is it the downvoters and their ilk in silicon valley, seeking to stifle the free flow of the information that the community wants to see flow?

These are questions that each person will answer in their own way.

Before answering, I'd like you to check out the following documentary (that was zeroed by Curangel), which demonstrates that the same 3 investment groups have controlling shares over ALL the biggest corporations in ALL the world's industries! You really think they don't work together in their own interests? They start wars too.

You can also listen to the following Doctors/Scientists - including Dr. Robert Malone - who has been posting to 3Speak and that even crashed 3Speak temporarily due to attracting so many viewers!

Whether you feel able to identify who is more responsible for doing harm here or not - I'd like to point out now that a mature response is one that acknowledges that everyone has their own ability to think, process information and time available to access evidence. It serves no-one to start hostile aggression towards others and respect for others is key - it also shows self respect too. Part of respecting others and self is to take our own words seriously enough to take the time to interact with others when we get involved with changing their lives somehow on the basis of what they think or say. So far, the Curangel approach has been sneering, arrogant and avoidant, rather than engaging, mature and wise. It would be great if we could uplift the conversation here rather than continue a downward spiral into nothingness.