I saw a post today on Hive where the author was trying to do some technical analysis about the market. So I noticed that the person didn't do hopium or FUD analyses, just analyses based on the altruistic state of the market and what to expect next.
So, after reading through, I decided to check the comment section, and there was one particular comment that piqued my interest.
I have had similar comment from this particular user on my post sometimes back, and the sentiment they echoed on my post was just like the one they left on this beautiful piece of technical analysis sone by the original poster.
The original poster's post was quite long, and in one of the paragraphs, they expressed some concerns about Hive. Now, the person who commented below highlighted that section of the post and wrote their entire comment on it.
They did not even take the time to read the original poster's analyses, and I have noticed that this same user expresses this sentiment almost everywhere they see a technical analysis of the market, particularly TAs about Hive.
In the majority of their comments, they were certain that Hive would fail and would most likely not pump with the rest of the market because the DHF was funding useless projects.
They also went on to say they don't mind if everywhere goes to hell , as they have nothing to lose.
Now, this account has a strong reputation and has been sharing content for a long time. So my question was, why stay on a ship that will potentially sink, while also seeking for active support for their contents?
I guess eat their cake and have it
For me, there is a distinction between constructive criticism and FUD, and we sometimes transition from the former to the latter.
Now, if this account had not been sharing this sentiment on posts everywhere they went, I might have assumed it was the market making them angry, as it does to all of us.
Almost everyone shares the DHF funding sentiments. 90% of the people here are against the DHF piling debts on Hive, and while there are many people who want the DHF to be terminated, it is still disbursing cash to valueplan and others.
I understand how infuriating and annoying this can be, but using it as a narrative to spread FUD throughout the chain is no longer considered constructive criticism.
At some point, it begins to rub off as the truth
Because of our life experiences, it is easy for us to fall into pessimism. I've been in a pessimistic place, and it's hard to imagine that a fun guy like me will be in that place, but here's what I've learned about pessimism: It causes you to ignore all positive cues and concentrate on the only negative cue.
It is like a kid finishing second in class. Now they forget that they beat 20 or 30 other students in class to second place and concentrate on the fact that they were unable to beat or outperform the person in first place.
We now underestimate how easily pessimism can rub off on others. Most of the time, we reflect our ideas or perceived reality on how reality feels, which can cause or create ripples.
Will the DHF stop or reduce funding for valueplan?
I do not know.
Unfortunately, this is one of the few drawbacks to the Hive Blockchain's consensus mechanism, delegated proof of stake (DPOS). Users with no stake in influencing DHF funding can only complain but not change anything, so why?
Because the Blockchain is designed in such a way that they only need a skin to have a voice.
Will this have fatal consequences?
Perhaps, but should we dwell on it, or should we continue to speak out and advocate until something changes? Maybe the second idea is better.
For me, I try to avoid FUDsters as much as possible because I believe their perception of what will happen is skewed. We do not know what will happen in 3 to 4 months, but we are not the worst in the crypto space, and we have done more good than bad.
I like to see the glass as half full rather than half empty, and I am a very pessimistic person to some extent, but I try as much as possible not to let my pessimism become FUD.
Interested in some more of my posts