#poll

Poll: Enhancing the "Mute" Feature

Poll Mute.jpg

Hello Steemians, we want to hear your thoughts on whether we should expand the “Mute” feature on steemit.com (specifically “Condenser” the open source software that powers steemit.com and a number of other sites) to include hiding comments on a blog from visitors to that blog if the author has Muted the commenter.

TL;DR

Leave a comment starting with “YES” if you believe that when you Mute another user that their comments should be hidden from your blog for other Steem users.

Leave a comment starting with “NO” if you believe that when you Mute another user that their comments should remain visible to the visitors of your blog even if you have Muted them.

After "YES" or "NO" you should feel free to share any additional thoughts you might have on the topic.

Ownership

At Steemit, we take very seriously the concept of “ownership.” Steem enables users to retain ownership of their social information and we believe that great Steem applications should play to this strength. But this question isn’t always straightforward, especially at the user interface level. It can also conflict with some people’s views on censorship.

Non-Consensus

One thing that will never change is that any information posted to the Steem blockchain will be open and accessible to anyone. This feature change we are suggesting would have no impact on that whatsoever. All comments will always remain on-chain, and any developer is always free to provide an interface that displays that information. We call these types of changes “non-consensus.”

Free Speech

We believe that you should always have the right to make your views public, but you do not have the right to harass, spam, or otherwise pollute someone else’s space. A user’s blog (and in the future their Community) should be a place where they feel safe to speak their mind. What good is censorship-resistance if people are censoring themselves out of fear?

Giving users the ability to hide any toxic elements from their space, while still leaving every other user free to make that determination for themselves, will enable everyone to express themselves more freely. What good is freedom if people don’t feel safe enough to use it?

Improving UX

We think that expanding the “Mute” feature walks the right line between preserving a person’s right to speak while also preserving a user’s right to protect their property and even enhance its value. We believe that this could dramatically improve the user experience on steemit.com by enabling users to ensure that the visitors to their blog see only high quality comments.

Open Source

As always, the fact that both steemit.com and Steem are open source ensures that if anyone does not like how the information stored on the blockchain is displayed, they can easily launch their own version of the site, or use one of the many alternative user interfaces that already exist.

But what do you think? This is a feature that is intended to improve the user experience on steemit.com, so if you don’t think it will do that, be sure to vote “NO” in the comment section below.

When SMT Tho?!

Since we know people will say it, implementing this feature is trivial and will not delay any ongoing development efforts. That ease of implementation is a consequence of our Hivemind software which was developed by @roadscape (a/k/a “Hive”) and makes it extremely easy to alter how user interfaces interpret data stored on the blockchain.

If you'd like to learn more about the progress we've been making on SMTs, be sure to check out the recent post by Steemit Blockchain Engineer @gerbino.

The Poll!

But we digress! This post is about whether or not we should expand the “Mute” function on steemit.com.

Leave a comment starting with “YES” if you believe that when you Mute another user that their comments should be hidden from your blog for other Steem users.

Leave a comment stating only “NO” if you believe that when you Mute another user that their comments should remain visible to the visitors of your blog even if you have Muted them.

Don't hesitate to leave any additional feedback, including suggestions for other features you'd like to see added to steemit.com.

The Steemit Team

Comments · 96

@memehub(68)· 2586d
NO, I think other in the comments have addressed why the answer should be no.
@berniesanders(77)· 2587d
You guys are motherfucking clueless morons. That's all I have to say.
@miniature-tiger(70)· 2589d
No.

Muting / posting rights and restrictions should be handled by the "communities" hardfork. Each community can then set its own rules for how to handle spam / comment advertising / abuse etc.
@barton26(56)· 2589d
No
@itspatrice(33)· 2589d
Solid NO from me.
@justtryme90(71)· 2589d
NO
@xyzashu(75)· 2589d
Hello!

Are you asking this to me? I've proxied all development related decisions to my Witnesses. So shouldn't they need to vote on this? Or do they vote only for Steem related issues and not Steemit - related?

Actually, your handle is very confusing to me. You should have 2 different handles viz. steemitblog and steemblog to publish updates relevant to respective issues.

Here you're talking about front-end and SMT in the same post. This increases the confusion between Steem and Steemit.
@udow(62)· 2589d
I don't believe that this is a question where you can only answer with yes or no.

In the end it's the question why you mute him - there are different reasons and because of this my suggestion would be, that if you mute somebody you can yourself decide if comments in your blog from this user will be visible for all.

Would this be a good solution ?
@eliot01(43)· 2590d
Yes, pero que se vea cuando el bloguero a silenciado a alguien.
@ajayyy(65)· 2590d
NO
@kobold-djawa(73)· 2590d
yes
@lordbutterfly(80)· 2590d
YES.

Posted using Partiko Android
@scorer(58)· 2590d
NO

I have seen a lot of GOOD users posting comments under posts created by BAD users or abusers. It helped me to make my own decisions on who is who. I would like to keep that right. 🧐

Flag feature should be fixed instead.
@ew-and-patterns(71)· 2590d
No!
@arcange(79)· 2590d
Congratulations @steemitblog! Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:
- Comments - Ranked 2 with 132 comments
@tonygreene113(64)· 2590d
No, leave it alone.
@clixmoney(78)· 2590d
NO

I have nothing to hide, I would like to see everything written about me and I like others to see it as well. You understand this way who is your enemy and who is your friend. You understand what all people think about you. Maybe there are who want to hide something, that's why they want this option. It's their problem, please leave it as it is, it's the blockchain after all, everything need to be seen. The funny thing that if you impliment this, it will be seen in the blockchain anyway. So, leave it as it is. I think it's better !
@ijr45(26)· 2590d
NO.

We have the option to up- and downvote content we like and dislike respectively.

A mute option as discussed goes against the idea of free speech.
@marki99(62)· 2590d
YES
@lukestokes(77)· 2590d
NO

(but something else might work better)

I'd prefer to see something somewhat like the irredeemables list, but in a decentralized way. https://github.com/steemit/irredeemables

By that, I mean individuals could choose to use the mute lists of other users they trust. This could help improve the user experience here while keeping the decentralized nature of Steem social media and only allowing "censorship" via consensus and individual user choice.

Example:

Person A is sick of seeing so much crap on Steemit such as spammy comments, abusive comments, etc. They want a solution.

Person B, C, and D are trusted members of the community. Maybe they are witnesses. Maybe they are leaders within their social circle. Maybe they have a lot of real followers. Maybe they've done a good job of curating real relationships on Steemit, and they've created their own mute lists for improving the user experience here.

Person A trusts B, C, and D and in their settings, chooses to use these mute lists to improve their experience.

You could also display a list of the most used mute lists. Maybe Person B is trusted by the most number of people to create a good experience and not unnecessarily censor people. When a new user joins Steemit, they should be given a step-by-step walkthrough of how Steemit works which includes asking if they'd like to select one or more mute lists (while also explaining the censorship-resistant nature of blockchain social media and how nothing is actually "censored", just hidden from view).

Ideally, the results of these mute lists would only hide (not fully mute) comments, similar to what happens now with a downvoted comment. When they view the comment, it would show which list the poster was included on and who maintains that list with a simple option right there to remove that list from your selection of mute lists.

The "most used mute list" could have some Sybil attack issues, but that could be figured out over time as a community.
@asgarth(72)· 2590d
I've seen that @jarvie already answered this poll, but I'm going to write my 2 cents too. From my point of view the post author should have more control over his blog, but the reader must be able to choose if he wants to follow the author preferences or not. Also it should be always possible to view all the comments easily, without leaving the post itself.

This is how it works on https://steempeak.com. Not going to share a screenshot because I've seen that it's already in a comment :)
@lenmar(50)· 2590d
Absolutely NOT

Posted using Partiko Android
@kawaiicrush(66)· 2590d
Of 124 responses at this very moment "111" people said NO.

My response to your question is the same NO!

As for the 'opposite of no' there is currently '28' bozos among us! According to the results pulled from an F3 search. Give or take someone could have used the word twice, same with the 'N' of course.
@immanuel94(73)· 2590d
NO
@johnhtims(58)· 2590d
NO.
@gadrian(76)· 2590d
A solution like the one implemented by SteemPeak seems the right one, giving any steemian the choice on how he or she sees or not the muted comments on a blog. By the avalanche of "NOs", seems like the setting should be by default set to not following the mute options of the blog author. Still wondering what should happen by default for visitors.
@raj808(77)· 2590d
No

Posted using Partiko Android
@fingolfin(63)· 2590d
NO-For all the reasons @anyx listed.

If you are really all about letting the user control the info they see on their own page then why do I have to have a bunch of featured posts show up in my feed that I have absolutely no interest in from users I choose not to follow?
@holoz0r(78)· 2590d
NO.

Posted using Partiko Android
@quantumdeveloper(58)· 2590d
NO
@steemalbania(50)· 2590d
NO
@prameshtyagi(71)· 2590d
YES - and YES^100000000000000000000000.
@hungryharish(67)· 2590d
NO.

AS we are giving full ownership for the content for the creator and you should also full rights to readers and curators to share their opinions and comments. This is only leads to the silencing of the critics and reduction of the freedom of speech. Every comment should be visible to anyone to understand the other's perspective on the same content
@mup(55)· 2590d
YES , is a must need feature, there's too much bot spam every time someone is posting an article. "Your post won x award.", "You've been selected for x,y,zzz reward", "This post was promoted with..." and so on. I find that annoying and it doesn't add any value to the content.
@howo(76)· 2590d
NO, @anyx said it best : "Plagiarists, identity thieves, or other fraudsters will mute comments from anyone calling them out on their actions. This means the @steemcleaners and @cheetah efforts would be useless, so you could say goodbye to them.

The appropriate reaction to comments one does not like is downvoting them."

Also why not dpoll ?
@joythewanderer(81)· 2590d
No

Why should we decide for others to see other comment? Then it’s no social network any more.

If you can’t take different opinions, then internet isn’t a place for you.
@chekohler(76)· 2590d
No - this feature would do more harm than good and only serve to make steemit the same as any other social media where people can create cosy echo chambers for themselves!

I would actually like more data instead of less so people can make uo their own minds with all the facts and not just people able to shape narratives!

If you don’t like what someone has to say you can ignore it yourself but that doesn’t mean they are wrong or don’t have valid points! What some might consider harassment others might consider common sense

Posted using Partiko iOS
@aaronhawk(57)· 2591d
NO
@midlet(74)· 2591d
YES For the love of god YES please! I think some of the suggestions in the comments are good though, like letting the viewer decide whether they want to honor the preference of the author, but having the default be to respect their preference.

Improving user experience is NUMBER ONE priority, NOT censorship resistance, or protecting someone's right to troll, because let's be real, that's what it comes down to in reality.
@vimukthi(76)· 2591d
You should have seriously considered dpoll DAPP. Just got to https://dpoll.xyz and post this. Counting Yes/No would have worked very easily for everyone.
@steemitboard(66)· 2591d
Congratulations @steemitblog! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Your post was the most commented on one day

_{You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking} _{If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP}

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!

Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
@honusurf(62)· 2591d
What is wrong with it we mute them & they simply get lightened or greyed out? Isn't that what the whole SP and flag system is for? OMG going backwards STEEMIT again! Pansys!
@honusurf(62)· 2591d
Wait a minute, someone like me may then vanish from steemit, sounds like a scam. How are we going to get votes if no-one can see us anymore! Steemit might use the feature to block someone like me from every which way!
@theguruasia(69)· 2591d
@steemitblog, Yes, this is better. If we mute it's mute for everyone who is dealing with our blog posts. Yeah that's better!

Cheers~
@honusurf(62)· 2591d
NO!
@eastmael(69)· 2591d
Here's my final response. Intuitively, I'd say YES.

In this case, ownership supercedes preference. Since we're talking about Steemit website, then this feature is owned by Steemit, Inc and should definitely go with what best benefits User Experience for Steemit users.

Please also consider simplicity. Complexity is one of the enemies in software dev and should be addressed aggressively. I believe this seems to be one of those times.

As owner of my blog/post (and in the future a community), I believe this feature needs to be introduced sometime.

(Optional) The visitor to an author's blog then can have an option (in his settings) whether to honor the author's mute settings.
@reazuliqbal(68)· 2591d
NO

I am fearing misuse as explained by others despite it can have some good impacts.
@nealmcspadden(74)· 2591d
NO
@onthewayout(62)· 2591d
No
@por500bolos(68)· 2591d
“NO” I believe that when we Mute another user their comments should remain visible to the visitors of our blog even if we have Muted them.

Why? well, it is supremely simple indeed. Because if we (or whoever else) are able to actually censor and prevent other people to read and follow the ongoing sequential developing of a heated thread debate...

Who the hell is gonna know then:

¿Where the "Naked Truth" really is? & ¿Which of the interlocutors along the discussion was right?

Don't mess up with these 'thangs' kids.

Let the free awareness flow as it is due!!
@lextenebris(64)· 2591d
NO

Because this is ultimately the wrongheaded approach to solving the problem.

I don't want a spammer to have the right to invade my personal space. But I also don't want to give the power to decide what I see to someone who has written the original post just because they've written the original post. I don't always read things written by people I agree with. I don't always read things written by people that other people agree with. I don't necessarily trust either party to make decisions about what I see for me.

Ideally, the default would be NO and I could decide individually, by account, whether I trust them to have muted discussion in their comments appropriately. Some people I trust to make that kind of decision. Some people I definitely don't trust to make that kind of decision.

Ultimately, the decision of who I trust and who I don't trust should never be up to the platform because it's the platform's job to execute my will as regards to what I want to see, not to execute somebody's will on what I want to see.
@okean123(66)· 2591d
NO!

Posted using Partiko Android
@masterthematrix(61)· 2591d
NO. In general I don't agree with censoring comments on your own Blog, because the authors content is now open in the public for discussion and controversial opinions should be always visible. But I would like to see a feature where you can mute somebody else comments, but not for free! This service should cost you some Steem, if you really consider to mute somebody else on your Blog Post. To be specific I would like to see that Steem gets "burned" for the ability to mute, and the more users you "mute" on your Blog the more you have to pay! This would prevent that somebody "mutes" everyone that disagree on his posts, because it costs him Steem. And by doing so he would burn Steem and the whole community profits. I really would like to see some "sinks" as @aggroed always says to be implemented in your frontend Steemit.com. And this Service "to mute comments" could be your first of many "sinks" for Steem :-)
@ozphil(66)· 2591d
Yes
@arkmy(58)· 2591d
NO. Enhancing the mute feature is something trivial, alouds censorship and make steemit one step closer to centraliced platform. 👎

We want and we need Steemit's ads on the web, more collaborations and of course, SMT!!! 👍

Posted using Partiko Android
@oldtimer(76)· 2591d
So you going to decide on 50 opinions of random people who accidentally stumbled on this post and participate in the pool?
@distantsignal(66)· 2591d
No.

I’d rather leave it up to those who visit my blog and I agree with @anyx that the system could be abused to hide reasonable critiques and policing of bad content.

Posted using Partiko iOS
@franz54(76)· 2591d
No
@monster-one(75)· 2591d
No, We must not take the step into censorship ever.

What I really want is that when someone give a flag should leave a comment saying why he did it, stupid bots always ruining our network.
@jarvie(75)· 2591d
NO... Kinda

The end user / the consumer should be in charge of their decision. Happy if you want to copy this system from https://steempeak.com ... I'm sure @asgarth can help you out. It seems to have solved most issues people were having and users seem to be completely positive about it to date.

As you can see you could set your condensor to default use the mute settings of the author. BUT, there's an important of this solution... when you're on a post there's always the ability for the user to make a spot decision to see those "muted" / hidden comments if you really want to.
@fatherfaith(71)· 2591d
Yes
@newageinv(74)· 2591d
No, each user should decide only for what they see.
@southernwolf(54)· 2591d
NO

This is no different than shadow-banning on Twitter and Facebook, and has led to a whole host of issues. Not the least of which is creating echo-chambers where dissent is impossible.
@dr-frankenstein(66)· 2591d
No,

While I understand the importance of getting rid of spam, harassment, ... the feature will for sure be used to mute specific users simply because their opinions on a specific subject do not conform to the author's ideas.
@flemingfarm(81)· 2591d
No

This is for the other front ends to do not steemit.
@themarkymark(81)· 2591d
NO

I'm pretty mixed on this but I think no is the appropriate answer. While this would prevent a lot of trolls it will prevent other engagement too and silence opinions they disagree with pushing into censorship territory. It will also prevent the ability to warn users of scams, abuse, and other things the author may not want to be shown.

I really do appreciate making this a poll rather than just announcing it is happening provided it isn't just done anyway.
@jaki01(77)· 2591d
YES
@abitcoinskeptic(75)· 2591d
No, it seems to be a pointless feature. There are other front ends that have this feature already.

However if you were able to put in a function for users to send #nomute urls (for the cleaners to proove, etc.), similar to ?=nomute or whatever it would be alright, I suppose

Posted using Partiko Android
@bluerobo(70)· 2591d
No

Posted using Partiko Android
@chrisrice(68)· 2591d
Yes.
@chrisrice(68)· 2591d
Yes.
@blocktrades(80)· 2591d
It would require a small amount of extra coding, but you could implement this as follows:
1. a user setting for posters that specifies whether the user wants this muting to potentially take place on his posts.
2. a user setting for readers that specifies whether the reader wants to honor this mute setting on posts he reads.
Then default the user setting to honoring the mute setting on posts he reads (and probably default the poster setting to do the muting on his posts).
@ats-david(75)· 2591d
NO

Users should be able to decide who they want to see, not what other users ought to see.

Silencing critics isn’t something that should be entertained on a “censorship-resistant” and “decentralized” platform. It’s only one of two selling points you actually have for social media users in the first place.
@ironshield(76)· 2591d
Yes

Posted using Partiko Android
@eastmael(69)· 2591d
Yes and No.

Yes because I'm only muting them so that their comments don't show in my blog, but they're free to create their own blog. One particular scenario that come to mind are posts made by themarkymark are being spammed by comments.

No. Because of the comment made by anyx.

I guess this requires more thought.
@thecryptodrive(70)· 2591d
YES - BUT! Done differently, for example you may want to mute a specific user from your view in general but you may not necessarily want to mute them from the view of others. There are also cases where you may want to hide only certain comments from a certain user that are not suitable, so maybe a hide/unide comment button would be best. However this also risks stuff being taken out of context. Perhaps the whole concept is a bit risky for now, it works more for forums where discussions should be on topic, but could be abused and create a biased view in a blog format. There will be no more disagreements for fear of having your views hidden for example.
@waleedtee(45)· 2591d
NO. That is to preserve the helpful efforts by real persons revealing scams and those by @steemcleaners, @cheetah, and other reporting bots. Otherwise, the author will be able to mute such bots and even real persons to get away with their scams.
@nokodemion(59)· 2591d
YES
@steevc(80)· 2591d
No. I think it would be misused. People who plagiarise or otherwise abuse Steem would hide comments from those calling them out. That said, I can see valid uses for it, but it's better to not censor.
@daltono(81)· 2591d
YES.

And I can only say yes as of recent. Some trolls just never stop. That alone makes me want a definite mute feature.

I have only muted 2 or 3 people ever. I know that my followers would love for those 2-3 people to not be shown on my blog leaving nasty comments they benefit nobody.
@roelandp(78)· 2591d
No. Imho anyone should decide whom to mute.
@transisto(75)· 2591d
NO
@anyx(70)· 2591d
Absolutely not. Plagiarists, identity thieves, or other fraudsters will mute comments from anyone calling them out on their actions. This means the @steemcleaners and @cheetah efforts would be useless, so you could say goodbye to them.

The appropriate reaction to comments one does not like is downvoting them.

A better solution to "the problem" is user opt-in mute lists that are community maintained. A community should be able to publish a list of accounts they mute. A user can opt-in to using this list, or the set union of multiple lists they subscribe to. If one has ever used adblocking, it would function like this -- lists one subscribes to to enjoy a curated experience.
@freebornangel(72)· 2591d
No.

Unless detractors are allowed to speak up publicly the truth gets hidden.
@condeas(68)· 2591d
NO
@aaliyahholt(71)· 2591d
Yes. May I suggest if you mute someone that person nor you can comment on each others content?

Posted using Partiko Android
@joshman(74)· 2591d
YES

But I said I only want brown M&Ms in the green room.

Edit: I'll just add the stipulation that certain community accounts such as anti-abuse accounts be let through no matter what.
@fragmentarion(61)· 2591d
Yes
@toofasteddie(77)· 2591d
YES , More power for the user is always good

Posted using Partiko iOS
@patrickulrich(70)· 2591d
Yes

Posted using Partiko Android
@elsiekjay(77)· 2591d
YES PLEASE! I & Many Other have raised this concern, mostly a Block Feature is What we had in Mind, but if I get to not see people who harass me on my blog with this feature, it's equally good. I believe as content creators we should have the right to exclude some people from our space if they bring about negative energy all the time!
@jsantana(71)· 2591d
No.

Why don't enable a KYC feature for every user like years ago Steem Verify did? I think that this is a great feature to avoid spam, abuse, hate speach and another millions of conflicts that happens here.

Posted using Partiko Android
@phoenixwren(73)· 2591d
Yes. Y u no use dpoll? ;)

Posted using Partiko Android
@richardcrill(68)· 2591d
YES
@jondoe(76)· 2591d
YES. Users need more control over their own blogs.

I would also like to see the number of witness votes per account lowered from 30 to 10 or 5, to better decentralize the leadership.
@lunaticpandora(70)· 2591d
YES

TL;DR

Ownership

Non-Consensus

Free Speech

Improving UX

Open Source

When SMT Tho?!

The Poll!

Comments · 96

NO.

Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!

NO!

Who the hell is gonna know then:

Let the free awareness flow as it is due!!

NO... Kinda

More from @steemitblog