Out of 18,235 active accounts over the last 7 days, Steemit's reputation system thinks I have the 70th highest reputation with a 64.4 score which puts me in the top 0.38% as far as reputation scores go. Whether or not that's an accurate reflection of my character, likability, or usefulness to the community is beyond the scope of this post.
Before we get started, here's a quick ~1 minute intro video to set the tone:
To the extent my reputation number has value and gives me a platform, let me share with you some advice which I think will increase your reputation on Steemit while also making you an all around better human being (in my entirely subjective opinion).
It's a simple test you can run before taking any action:
Ask yourself, if everyone in the community did this, would it harm or help the community?
It's really that simple.
For those who like examples, I'll run through some. I'm not trying to single out anyone or shame anyone.
If everyone sent random people on steemit.chat a direct message when they post a new blog, would that lower the value of the chat and cause people to leave?
Answer: Don't DM people you don't know with links to your new post. Even with people you know, make sure you're adding value to them based on your relationship with them.
If everyone started sending .001 SBD messages to others linking to their latest post, would the wallet turn into a massive wall of spam and lower the value of that feature?
Answer: It doesn't matter how important you feel your cause or post is, your reputation will be harmed if you do this because you are very likely to get flagged.
If everyone started posting full articles on Steemit from other sources (yes, even if you reference the author, and it's not downright plagiarism), will that harm the network?
Answer: I'll leave it to @cheetah's excellent post by @anyx to answer this one. You're most likely not the exception to the rule.
If everyone plagiarized other people's work, how would we reward original, creative work?
Answer: It's sad to even have to say "Plagiarism is bad, mmkay?" but I see many people (some with other cultural backgrounds) who seem to be confused by this simple concept. If it's not yours, don't post it, unless you have permission. Simple as that.
If everyone responded with criticism, overly dogmatic opinions, close-minded thinking, poorly expressed negative emotions, or other abusive or threatening language, would the network be an inclusive place for exploration and learning?
Answer: Be respectful, even if you're outraged. Rise above the muck and show yourself dignified and worthy of high reputation. Don't be a doormat, but learn how to disagree and walk away when needed. If you're worried more about your honor than the well-being of the community, your reputation will ultimately suffer.
If everyone fed the trolls, would we attract more trolls?
Answer: If someone truly is a troll that is clearly lowering the value of the network for everyone, do us all a favor and flag them. A good hint here should be their existing reputation. If it's higher than yours, you might want to second guess your perspective. Maybe pull some people aside in chat with a higher rep than you both and ask for a mediator.
If everyone flagged content they don't like or, worse, responded when flagged with a flag of their own, will it decrease the value of the network?
Answer: I've heard multiple reports of flag wars and retaliatory flagging. I get that it used to be a downvote, but the current Steemit interface has it as a flag which implies its usage should be for preventing abuse, plagiarism, identity theft, and the like. If you don't like someone's views, I suggest you move on or leave a comment if you want to engage with them. If someone is flagging you for no reason whatsoever and is not responding to dialogue about why they are flagging you, it might be appropriate to flag them in order to lower their reputation to the point where they can do no more harm to others. But be careful here... Often flags come from people who don't understand the interface and think they are upvoting. I've been flagged in this way, but a simple comment cleared it up.
You should still be unique within the community!
The test above is certainly open to valid critiques. For example, if you want to do a makeup tutorial and then consider the net negative effect to the network if everyone did a makeup tutorial, it might hinder your creative expression. So how are you to know which things would be beneficial to everyone on a small scale and detrimental to everyone on a larger scale? This is where we get into deeper philosophical moral concepts about voluntary interactions and community social norms. Unfortunately, some people have very low emotional intelligence levels or are lacking in mirror neurons / empathy to even recognize the negative impact their actions have on others.
What can we do about the stupid people?
I don't know for sure. As a member of the "stupid people" category myself (trust me, we all are, given various contexts), I can only give my own experience in becoming less stupid over time. Learn from your mistakes. Evaluate what others in the community appreciate and what angers them. Practice empathy like a skill you need to hone.
- Be Humble.
Recognize, even when you know you're right, you might be wrong.
- Be Kind.
Use language which respects everyone involved. You probably don't know someone else's backstory, their struggle, or their pain.
- Learn and use NVC.
Violence is a tragic expression of an unmet need.
And also, remember, you are awesome.
