@gavvet

Well, first - I would argue that powering down doesn't necessarily mean that someone doesn't care about the platform...unless you think that most of the whales and even the founders themselves don't care, since they've powered down in the past and some still are now. So, I really don't think that's a fair argument.

Second - asking questions about guild operations isn't "incitement." What may seem like attacks to you may simply be an honest criticism or concern by other users. And honestly, the answers that have been given about some of those concerns - even if you feel like they were great responses - just don't sit well with the concerned users. There *are* legitimate questions, but it's hard to have a discussion when the people responding immediately start accusing others of "jealousy," "witch-hunting," and "in-fighting."

Seriously...how many times are we going to go down this road? Nearly every time a concern is raised, the first usual response is: "You're just jealous!" or "WITCH-HUNTERS!"

Then, we usually find out later that there really was an issue or that the concerns were valid and the issue was later corrected because someone actually voiced their concerns in a public forum. But the first people to come out are usually vilified for it...and later never apologized to for being shouted down and called names. Why can't we have a civil discussion?

Third - I can understand the frustration of users like @mynameisbrian. I was part of one of the recent chats where this stuff was brought up and discussed. It turned negative pretty quickly because two of the users simply wanted to attack each other. But ultimately, the questions weren't really answered, the concerns were dismissed, and everyone left frustrated. And to this point right now, nobody wants to take the concerned parties seriously. So, yes - I completely understand Brian's frustration. Nobody from Steem Guild seems to be taking this seriously and what is being seen as an abuse continues every day. 

So, if anyone would like to have an honest and open discussion without flagging each other or calling people names, then let's have it. But if the posts like this are going to continue and members of the guild are just going to vilify others as disruptive or toxic, then I don't see how that's going to convince anyone that something *isn't* wrong. You guys *do* understand how that looks, right?

>Minnows powering down on the other hand cannot be viewed in the same light...

That's not a valid argument. You don't know why they're powering down. And it also has no relevance to whether or not their concerns are legitimate and whether or not abuse is occurring. This argument is a red herring.

>...the parties cannot continue to claim that no responses were given.

Well, in this case, either no responses were given to some of the questions/concerns or the answers simply did not address the actual concerns...they were just dismissive. Such as:

>...its their power and their rules. 

This is at the heart of the concerns about Steem Guild. "Their power, their rules" doesn't actually address the main concern about the guild's effects. And it certainly doesn't address the criticisms about self-voting with the guild's power - which, as I stated already, is supposed to be a guild for the express purpose of ensuring that certain users aren't being overlooked and unrewarded for their good content. But that's only one argument. There are many others. "Their power, their rules" doesn't cut it. That's not how you address issues with a project that was allegedly created for a specific purpose but seems to have several negative consequences/side-effects.

>You operate in a guild yourself you know how things work.

I actually don't operate in a guild. But yes, I do know how some of these things work - and based on what I'm seeing, there are many problems with the operations.

>I put up two posts hoping for open and honest discussion. I don't know if you saw them?

I did see them. However, I don't see the relevance to any of these discussions. I haven't seen anyone mentioning that there has been "draining of the rewards pool." I think the major point of contention (especially with Brian) was the self-voting of several personal accounts with 80-100% of the guild's power every day. That isn't necessarily a "draining the pool" argument. 

But, since you've brought it up, do you not find an issue with two or three guild members regularly sitting in the top-five on the trending page nearly every day? Do you believe that this was the intent of the guild and that this is how it ought to be?

(I would love to not have this thread limit maxed, so if we can continue this on a new one, that would be great.)

>This whole debacle began as "draining the rewards pool", "stealing", "greedy pigs" accusations, perhaps you missed that.

Perhaps I did miss that. But if it's the user that I think you're referring to, then that's not the one that's actually bringing up most of the legitimate concerns. He's just mostly upset that the guild does not vote for him. However, he *does* have *some* valid points.

 >A user powering down and selling adds in their own small way to selling pressure on the markets and shrinks the reward pool for everyone, since it is based on market cap.

I honestly don't know what you're trying to say here.

>Not a true guild perhaps, but let me remind you of tombstone.

And let me remind you that I am not operating a guild and have never stated that my voting was done for "the betterment of Steemit" or that my goal was to specifically distribute rewards to certain people who need them because they have been overlooked. I have a trail and I vote on content because...

1. I like it.
2. I appreciate the effort put into it.
3. I want to support the specific user.
4. I believe I can maximize curation rewards.

Or a combination of two or more. My voting and the use of my trail is nothing more than that. My followers can also come and go as they please. 

>As stated... it is being dealt with and multiple alternatives are being explored, a little patience will see that situation resolved.

OK. But in the meantime, the self-voting is still occurring on a daily basis, on multiple guild member accounts. Is it just not possible to...

1. Stop the self-voting?
2. Vote with the same 25% that you vote on everyone else's posts?

This is what I mean when I say that the concerns are not being taken seriously. You know it's an issue, you're allegedly seeking alternative methods, but you're still doing the very thing that is seen as abusive by many users. It's a simple solution, really. 

And I'm not sure how hard it is to find an alternative method. There are two very easy solutions that can be implemented *right now.*

1. Have the various whales pay you directly for curating with their guild.
2. Set up a trail where you and the other guild members can front-run the whale votes - so that you are earning SP like any other curator on the platform for curating content.

Are these not valid solutions? Why do the whales and guild members believe that your curation *ought* to receive vastly larger amounts of pay than any other curator on the platform - with rewards that come from the daily post pool? If you believe there's a valid justification for why several members of the guild ought to receive several hundred dollars (or a thousand dollars) per week for their curating, then tell us. Tell us why you believe that your curation is that much more valuable than the curation of every other user/curator on the platform. Show us how the guild is returning that kind of value to the platform through its stated goals of distribution. 

If you have some solid figures that can justify this, I don't think anyone would have a problem. But my guess is that there's really no evidence of any quantifiable benefit, which is why there are concerns about the voting habits.

Some valid points, but in many instances the parties asking the questions don't really seem to want an answer, simply to push their own agenda...

Numerous answers have been given on this matter in a number of forums but the incitement continues.

Isn't it amazing how trolls on steemit often disguise themselves as "defenders of the rewards pool".

How is the "community" supposed to take someone that claims to have the long-term growth of steemit at heart (@mynameisbrian), that is powering down?

Finally a civil discussion, please allow me to respond in kind.

1st. Whales and founders powering down is a good thing as it helps to correct the drastic imbalances in STEEM power. Minnows powering down on the other hand cannot be viewed in the same light... especially if they expect to have a say over how the rewards system is utilized, since it is a vest dominated process. Simply put, if you diminish your own STEEM power you extinguish your own voice.

2nd. "honest criticism or concern" is generally framed better. 
If the responses "just don't sit well "... the parties cannot continue to claim that no responses were given. 

You operate in a guild yourself you know how things work. 

The whales that provide the power determine the parameters under which the guild operates... its their power and their rules. Please see my posts linked below.

3rd. I can't say much on chats, in my experience they often exude the odor of a cesspool and differences escalate quickly. 

I put up two posts hoping for open and honest discussion. I don't know if you saw them?

https://steemit.com/stats/@gavvet/draining-the-rewards-pool-the-numbers

https://steemit.com/stats/@gavvet/draining-the-rewards-pool-part-2-some-clarification

>However, I don't see the relevance to any of these discussions. I haven't seen anyone mentioning that there has been "draining of the rewards pool."

This whole debacle began as "draining the rewards pool", "stealing", "greedy pigs" accusations, perhaps you missed that.

This post specifically demonstrates how guilds have bought about the long tailed curve and more balanced rewards distribution.

https://steemit.com/stats/@gavvet/draining-the-rewards-pool-the-numbers

This one then points out that currently the steem blockchain is a Feudal System and cannot be a democracy.

https://steemit.com/stats/@gavvet/draining-the-rewards-pool-part-2-some-clarification

Most of these concerns are democratic in nature and ignore the Feudal fundamentals.

>That's not a valid argument. You don't know why they're powering down. And it also has no relevance to whether or not their concerns are legitimate and whether or not abuse is occurring. This argument is a red herring.

A user powering down and selling adds in their own small way to selling pressure on the markets and shrinks the reward pool for everyone, since it is based on market cap. 

Should I develop a concern about users powering down and start a crusade? would my concerns be any less legitimate?

>I actually don't operate in a guild.

Not a true guild perhaps, but let me remind you of tombstone.

>But, since you've brought it up, do you not find an issue with two or three guild members regularly sitting in the top-five on the trending page nearly every day? Do you believe that this was the intent of the guild and that this is how it ought to be?

Here, I do agree with you, it is not ideal and is being dealt with as we speak, it is a momentary apparition.

I actually raised this three weeks ago, when additional whale stake was added, and trend levels were affected. 

This was weeks before these concerns had materialized in any community minds, but the wheels of the guild turn a little slower due to its  composition.

As stated... it is being dealt with and multiple alternatives are being explored, a little patience will see that situation resolved.

>I honestly don't know what you're trying to say here.

Do you understand howthe  market cap of steem and daily reward pool are linked? and how selling STEEM drives prices down. 

Authors that don't cash out their "earnings", help keep the daily reward pool from shrinking by limiting the decrease in Steem market capitalization. 

So when you see frequently trending authors powering up they are not actually removing anything from the system. All rewards that are powered up and that don't go to user that are cashing out grow the ecosystem and in the end, ensure that there are more rewards to go around in future.

Everybody that practices the opposite decreases future potential.

You can't just view the rewards pool from the one day at a time perspective.

Have you stopped to think that perhaps some of these elements might also be in play?

>seen as abusive by many users

I think you are overstating the numbers a little here. A noisy minority does not constitute many.

>Or a combination of two or more. My voting and the use of my trail is nothing more than that. My followers can also come and go as they please.

There is an element of trail involved in what is causing the high trending lately. Other whales and many others come and go as they please and that has distorted things especially lately.

>Tell us why you believe that your curation is that much more valuable than the curation of every other user/curator on the platform. Show us how the guild is returning that kind of value to the platform through its stated goals of distribution.

>If you have some solid figures that can justify this, I don't think anyone would have a problem.

Some people just have a problem for having the sake of a problem, not so!

But here are some facts and figures:

The guilds do far more than just curation, they are split up into a significant number of sections with a number of different voting trains. These trains and sections represent the different whale preferences. 

These preferences need to be managed. 

Some whale votes may be utilized for some types of posts but not others. 
The guild members are the eyes and ears of the delegated stake.

The posts by authors on the lists (continually having more added to it and others removed for plagiarism etc.) the published one was not the comprehensive list, are reviewed by at least two guild members before voting occurs. 

They are reviewed for many differing criteria depending on what type of post it is and which vote train will be used.

This is time consuming. 

There are some guild members that I wonder if they ever sleep, they are continually in and out at the oddest of times.

----

I put up the numbers and anybody if free to compile their own.

https://steemit.com/stats/@gavvet/draining-the-rewards-pool-the-numbers

On any given day there are around 600+ posts... about 100+ of these get under a dollar leaving 500 left.

Just one voting train votes consistently 150 -200 posts per day after the vetting as described for each post has been concluded, add to that the other specializations and the numbers go up to around the 250 mark. This does not include the posts that were reviewed and did not pass the vetting.

That means that in the region of over 50% of the posts on the entire site for the day were scrutinized multiple times and from different angles by SG and ended up with significant rewards as a direct result of their efforts. They fall into the $5 - $25 and often times higher depending on voting strength available and if others follow the vote train. The numbers are there... go see for yourself. 

Compare the skewed rewards distribution of before to the significant improvement it is lately. If you fail to see the value in that, or that those efforts do not need remuneration for time spent, then I can't help you.

It is a necessary evil until SP distribution is more balanced and the site can function as designed.

Actually I found you comic very funny, inaccurate, but funny. 

You had me laugh out loud first time I read it, but spamming it in many posts? 

It's getting a bit old.

@mynameisbrian, please join my discord server to discuss further action.  These Steem-Guild people are attempting to drain millions from the pool.  http://discord.cyberfield.tech