Dear BountyHive community. I guess all of you know well this quote:
‘NOTE: YOUR ENTRY STATUS IS 100% FINAL. Entries are double-checked by different members of our staff and we will NOT change the status of your entry after we've already verified it’.
This rule made by the BountyHive reminds me a beautiful Latin maxim “Lex retro non agit”, which translated to English sounds: „law isn't retroactive”. As you probably guess or know, this is a basic rule of Roman law which, by the way, is a base of modern national and international law. The problem arises when this rule is treated selectively.
Imagine what kind of a chaos would erupt if we would have to pay the difference between the actual tax (for example increased from 10% to 20%) back. Wouldn’t you protest against such as regulation?
Imagine, that the same situation happened at your work. Your boss changed the format of the articles he accepts. He told you that for example, he won’t accept the interviews from the next magazine edition. He has the right to do so and you would just stop writing the interviews. Although, imagine how bad surprise you would have if you don’t receive the payment for the interviews you wrote for the previous edition. Isn’t against the rules they set?
And now, change our metaphors to the real players. BountyHive is a boss, interviews are reviews and you don’t work for the magazine but for yourself, as a bounty hunter. Still, looks like breaking the agreement.
BountyHive made some steps against Steemit and I understand why. I’m a frequent reader of the announcement so from the moment you wrote - you don’t accept the Steemit (CubeChain), I started to post reviews on the self-owned domain.
But seriously, I would never expect that already posted reviews would be refused just because they were uploaded on the Steemit. I work in a bounty hunters team and I don’t know any of situation when the Steemit article (last two months period) has been accepted from any of us. Is it an accident? Isn’t a breaking of “lex retro non agit” rule? The same rule which doesn’t allow on any submissions changes?
Dear community, maybe I am not right. Maybe I just wrote a piece of crap. You can judge it yourself. You have an extra opportunity to read the articles, which even BountyHive team possibly didn’t read. I am really interested in your feedback:)
https://steemit.com/ico/@rdmtv/alt-estate-project-and-market-description
https://steemit.com/ico/@rdmtv/alt-estate-meet-the-team
https://steemit.com/ico/@annahare/wealthmigrate-project-review
https://steemit.com/ico/@annahare/utrum-a-new-platform-for-ico-reviews
https://bit.ly/2JYjsMM
https://bit.ly/2yjsSxJ
https://bit.ly/2t30Lh6
https://bit.ly/2K3TzuK
First three were “substandard”. The fourth one will be “substandard” in nearest future.
My intention is not to fight against you @SilviuBHive, @LukasBHive, @SethBHive. You make an excellent job and we bounty hunters really appreciate your attitude and time you spend with us.
I also don’t believe you will change your minds about the results. All I want is to rise up a discussion about the evaluation system and its transparency and to empower to the community to fight for their rights. If your article from Steemit has been refusing, send us links. Show off.
BountyHive if you have a special judgement system for Steemit, maybe you could provide a chance to move articles written before the CubeChain to another platform? At least the one you didn’t calculate yet?
I am in constant touch with the person responsible for the submissions – Silviu. He claims that:
“If the reason is referred to "substandard", as you said, then this means that there were lots of submitted entries that were better than yours in minimum half of the verification points. I will send you now what is considered in the verification process, in order to help you with your future entries
- Quality
- Content
- Length
- Views
- Comments
- Claps/Votes or other forms of reach
- The website it was posted on
- The quality of the video/article compared to the other ones submitted
- How grammatically correct it is”
But when I asked him about the Steemit. “And how the Steemit influence on this scheme?”, he replied:
“It is a bit harder with Steemit (as you can see it is no longer trusted by us) because 90% of the users who submitted articles from there had fake reach and fake comments. I can not interfere with decisions taken by our verification team, but I can guarantee for the quality of their decisions (they have verified more than 500k articles up to this date). My advice for you would be LinkedIn articles. LinkedIn is a stable platform where we often accept media content from.”
Community members, I am waiting for your activity. If your Steemit article has been rewarded post it here. Give us an example which will ruin my theory, cause for today I am overwhelmed by the number of Steemit refused articles.