Steemexclusive
It's been quite a while, erhaps a few years, since I last wrote about the #steemexclusive hashtag and what it actually entails. Back then, the discussion centred around stories I was posting on Steemit in my community, Tales & Stories. The Steemit team didn't really respond, although there was some discussion with other users and writers. My opinion back then hasn't changed to this day. What I write is my property, and it's up to me to decide what to do with it. It can't be right that once I post my story on this platform, I'm unable to post it anywhere else or publish it elsewhere, simply because it was assigned that particular hashtag.
The same applies to artists and photographers. Many photos posted these days can also be found on sites like Pixabay and other free platforms. You can easily create an account there, upload your photos, and make them available to others. Altered and unaltered images can be found here. As for generated images, the question remains: who owns them? Is it the person who owns the AI platform, or the individual who generates the image through prompts and may or may not modify it?
And what about NFTs? These are often not particularly unique, and AI is frequently used in their creation. Is it art or not? And who owns them? Is it the tool or app used? Is it the person who provides the prompts, perhaps with a bit of tweaking, or the individual who posts the image on this platform or elsewhere? Or is it the person who pays for it but will never truly own the image? After all, it's nothing more than an image on the blockchain or the internet.
Times have changed, and I believe opinions on this matter also depend on how Steem curators operate these days. The requirements for curators when it comes to rating posts or following guidelines are not as strict as they once were. Nowadays, the main concerns are simply the absence of AI and plagiarism.
But is it 100% verifiable that a rated image hasn't been altered, manipulated, or copied using AI? What constitutes an original image? I don't think this is always clear-cut.
Is it plagiarism if a post and/or image also appears on other platforms simply because the author chooses to post elsewhere? No, this isn't plagiarism, because the person posting the images and text is the same individual.
Is it always possible to determine whether something has been posted on different platforms or perhaps already published in a book? Unfortunately, the answer is no. What is easy for one person to find, another might struggle to locate, simply because the internet doesn't always function perfectly or due to other obstacles. I myself am unable to view all posts, as some are blocked for me—either because of EU regulations or the country I happen to be in at the time. The same applies to others, or at least I assume so, especially considering that many people use VPN to have access to Steemit.
Example:
I'm currently drawing, and I'm partly using a manga book as a reference. Why? Because people say this is an easier way to learn compared to realistic images and portraits. I can't say at this point whether that's true—it certainly doesn't feel that way.
But... if I draw something, am I a plagiarist, or is it my own work? Perhaps what I create isn't original, but how many texts on this platform can we genuinely say are original? To me most diaries look the same! And how many photos, not to mention all the times people use the same free images from sites that provide them?
To what extent do our creative ideas belong to Steemit? I don't believe they do. As long as they aren't paid for, as is the case with NFTs, it's up to the creator to do with them as they please.
Regarding the curators: most have never received proper training, and those who have been around for a while likely take honesty and decency into account. At least, I hope so, although this is certainly not always the case. Deals are made, partners receive large rewards, accounts in power-down are nominated and rewarded by SC01, and newcomers who post their introduction twice are rewarded twice without the team noticing. Also the same higher-ranking Steemians active in many functions often get nominated, week after week, month after month. It seems as though no one else exists on this platform besides them. And of course, there are many more things that make you think: that's completely wrong. However, I assume this is all just coincidence and that we are all human, with limited time and resources, and can only do our best. Right?
Prompt: see title
25-2-2026
I hadn't really explored this idea in depth for a simple reason: I only have one blog. However, personally, I don't see much point in posting the same content on multiple social media platforms. For example, I don't share my personal photos on both Instagram and Facebook; it's one or the other, and to be honest, currently it's neither. I'm not talking about a legitime issue, it just doesn't make sense to me. It would even be a matter of personal opinion.
In my current role as a curator, I don't like it when I find an identical post on another social network. It's a personal thing, but at least it aligns with the platform's policy, and I'm grateful I noticed it before voting. Even so, I don't doubt that some might have slipped through the cracks during the verification process.
Exemple of other difficulties: depending on the plagiarism detector you use, you can get different results when AI is suspected.
I learned that Steemit considers using your content on another network plagiarism when I verified a story written by a user. My duty was to let her know, since it wasn't exclusive to this platform. Now, calling it plagiarism seems a serious accusation, since the texts are her own work. She removed the posts immediately out of respect for the "steemexclusive" tag.
There are thousands of things that I would consider at least non-original content, used by many users across the web, most of the time without attribution; in fact, the origin gets lost along the way.
Regarding diaries, (I hope you understand what I mean) I once told a colleague that I thought they were one of the most original things on the platform, simply because no two days can be the same unless you have a very routine life and flat emotions about what happens in your life... and in my experience, it seems to me that some people create a story from photos that don't necessarily belong to the same day.
There is a lot to discuss and it is important to clearly differentiate between the terms non-exclusive and plagiarized, as well as the criteria for rewarding it. Given the different points of view/interpretations, it is best to have a single guideline and clear rules.
0.00 SBD,
27.86 STEEM,
27.86 SP
In my opinion, posts with the #steemexclusive hashtag mean that the text and photos are being published on Steemit for the first time. I believe that after publication, every author has the right to continue publishing content on other platforms.
Although the term "exclusive" itself implies uniqueness. At the time of publication, this is true. However, plagiarism is widespread online, and others can use your photos or text without the author's permission. I periodically find my photos on other platforms, published by others in their own name without my permission.
So why not give the author who first published unique material on Steemit the right to continue using it as they see fit.
0.00 SBD,
22.34 STEEM,
22.34 SP
I agree with you and like to add that no permission is needed. You are the owner of your photos and drawings and it like you said: whatever is posted on Steemit is not protected by the platform. Everyone can use your words, copy your photos.
It will be hard to always proof where was posted first. Unless leave date and time are specified underneath the posts.
If it comes to plagiarism, it's indeed widespread and even AI steals texts and pictures which is plagiarism as well.
It's good to see you again, I hope you are doing well.
#comment
0.00 SBD,
0.00 STEEM,
0.07 SP
The conclusion that I had from the steemexclusive hashtag was that it referred to steemX site of steem. As people use in hive like leo or ecency.
Looking back at it, seems obvious.
My intention was never to break any rules.
I know. Read what I wrote about #steemexclusive and the comments given by others.
It's your right to do with what you wrote as your like. Everyone is free to upvote you but if it comes to SC accounts the curators can't. For some reason it is labelled as plagiarism and not original, exclusive for Steemit only.
SteemX has nothing to do with it, neither have or had all the other apps or sites.
Hi, @galca,
Thank you for your contribution. Your post has been manually curated.
- Delegate to @ecosynthesizer and vote @symbionts as a witness to support us.
- Explore Steem using our Steem Blockchain Explorer
- Easily create accounts on Steem using JoinSteem
I'm going to say something that's a bit off-topic, and it's that I think the rivalry between Hive, Steem, and Blurt is childish, especially in Hive it's becoming an absurd witch hunt, to the point where a developer created a page to detect if a Hive user is active on other blockchains, in order to silence them! Web3 is sold as a refuge from censorship and corporate manipulation, and what they preach the most is content ownership, but now it turns out that there are punishments for using your own content on other platforms. I respect the #steemexclusive tag, I use it because I ran into a moderator here on Steem who instead of warning me about the rules, just silenced me, and when I rectified my "mistake", the moderator maintained the silence, and didn't even respond to me. I think there are a lot of fascists among us, the difference is the power they have, some use their negative voting power destroying reputations, and others silencing people instead of helping them in their role as moderators. In the end, if the content is ours, no one should censor or punish the use we give it, as long as we don't misuse it against third parties.
Idioma de origen: es_PY
Servicio de traducción: Meta AI Translator
Servicio de generación de imagen: Meta AI Image Generator
0.00 SBD,
20.67 STEEM,
20.67 SP
I'm afraid that if you're on Hive, you'll have to deal with the old Steemit "staff." They hoped to maintain control and were furious when it turned out one of the owners had sold his stake to Justin Sun (this is the owner's prerogative). The result was a clone of Steemit, and many who wanted to be on both platforms were vilified on Steemit. Disgusting comments were left, including ones depicting naked guys waving giant penises. They then downvoted everyone, and of course, the SBI (HSBI on Hive) came under fire. This could and can be disabled with a comment. Then, a blacklist was published on Hive containing names of everyone who also remained on Steemit. And yes, I received these comments, and my name was on that list. There was quite a stir, but many people stayed on Hive and took advantage of it. I was never accepted and could indeed have earned much more there, but I don't like being yelled at, and I also have a good memory.
I think it's great when someone starts their own platform, but you should put your energy into that, not into ruining and downvoting others' lives.
Some of these people also deliberately left their witness posts on Steemit open, creating gaps in the blocks (and data transfer), because they're sitting between the actual active witnesses.
I agree with you that it's extremely childish, and I can only say that Steemit witnesses would prefer the platforms to collaborate. Unfortunately, this isn't the case, and Steemit's prize pool (just like HIVE's) isn't infinite. Because of the way HIVE operates (the witch hunt), there do seem to be fewer scammers.
Nothing remains of the original intention (anonymity), but this also applies to the original plan (the white papers), where the intention was for everyone to read and upvote each other! The current SC teams shouldn't exist and weren't there in the beginning.
This is a perk, but not how it should be. Given that most people are here to earn money and are too lazy to read, comment, and vote for each other (a vote with a value of 0.00 is no vote at all in my opinion), I do believe the Steemit Team, and therefore the SCs, have the right to withhold upvotes for certain posts. A fair division of the pie seems only fair to me. Anyone who posts the same thing on more than one platform can earn money on all those platforms with a single post, unlike those who continually put their creativity to work and genuinely dedicate themselves to this platform.
With you I agree that the power a small group has is easily abused. That happened in the past, happens today, and will happen in the future. I can guarantee you, that is was way worse in 2024, where people who were in powerdown (out of need) but very loyal to the platform were ignored and treated like a pariah. I did my best to change this attitude. Today, we see that club status is no longer of importance; the SCs can upvote more freely and everyone can receive a reward in principle if they are found and here is a lot of work to do. Using the right hashtags for starters. You have no idea how many hours I invest in finding posts, reading them, checking them and and and... (I just speak for me, not the other SCs since I also see they upvote and nominate another and make deals).
#comment
Is very sad, and I feel that people is so selfish, is natural, I know, but anyway I don't understand because I know that the reward pool resourses are enough for everyone, but some people want more and find the way to obtain more, making scams.
I appreciate your honesty about saying that everyone here want be rewarder, because is the true, because we all can go to X or Blogger to write for free.
But I agree that the reward's sharing should be fair and cheaters users wouldn't receive reward's if they're detected.
And here lies the difficulty. When Steemit first started, we had to upvote each other. And that worked to some extent. Of course, there were also whales who had much more, and everyone tried to get in with them, or rather, to suck up to them in the hope of getting a single vote. I just don't believe that at that time, the platform was really there to provide people with an income. Of course, it was nice when you earned 30 or 40 or 80 dollars on a post, but the intention was not to earn an income. Then upvote bots appeared. I was, of course, one of those slowpokes who only found out about it later, and when I finally figured it out, it was banned. At that point, there was already a group that had amassed a lot of money thanks to these bots, and they were also in power, so to speak. A large group of them went on to set up Hive. So let's put it this way: ordinary people were banned from using these upvote bots, while the whales who had used them themselves continued to do so.
Incidentally, these upvote bots still exist on this platform and are used in WOX, among other places. This is also the reason why you see such high amounts under a post, full of language errors, regardless of whether it is something interesting. In addition, there are of course the self-votes. Again, it's the same story: you rank higher, often don't belong to a club, don't burn Steem and engage in self-voting, something that has been severely punished in recent years for the average user. And I'm not even talking about those who went into Power Down out of necessity. Apart from the communities that you and I probably see on average, there are of course many more. These are mainly found among the Koreans, Chinese, Bangladesh has a self-sufficient community and there are many more. There, too, you often see incredibly high amounts around posts that are not very significant. Here, too, the bots are at work, and at some point they vote themselves and so on. Loans are also granted, and people delegate all their SP to one person for an upvote. That is all Steem that stays with very large accounts and circulates and is absorbed. So it is not only the small players who are scammers or empty pools, but also whales and Steem witnesses who participate or cooperate, and that is of course where the biggest problem lies. It is understandable that an investor also wants to see some form of return on their investment and not just a loss or the same balance, because that is not why you invest, and large sums of money are involved. But there are also those who literally take in as much as possible and are absolutely not interested in how to maintain this platform.
In any case, this platform does not pay for what you and I post. Not on the basis of any particular body. That was never the intention; the intention is that we pay and reward each other, but that message does not get across to most people, and that is the biggest problem. The sad thing is that it costs you nothing to give someone else an upvote, except a little time and a tap on that button. The reward you give is not deducted from your earnings, so what's the problem? There are many whose upvotes are worthless, and yet... when they give a vote, they quickly get a valuable upvote in return. So why not make the effort? Many small ones add up to a big one, right?
What will happen when there are no more SC teams? I think that nowadays SC01 and SC02 are already giving fewer and lower votes... Often to the same people, but still.
Suppose all this stops, how many people will continue to write? Of course, the advantage of this over Facebook or Instagram, for example, is that you can get paid, but that also costs money. And on X, Facebook, YouTube and Instagram, you can also earn a lot of money if you know how.
And why do people talk for hours on WhatsApp but are too lazy to read a comment here and write a few replies or send a message to three people a day? I don't think WhatsApp pays yet. Not that I have WhatsApp, but that's how it seems to me.
🍀❤️
@wakeupkitty
Thank you very much, I appreciate your support 🙏❤️
Maybe I am mistaken. But I think the idea of asking writers to be ‘Exclusive’ was to stop them from posting the same content on competitors platform. They want loyal members. But here’s the thing. If they want an exclusive, they should at least acknowledge our ‘Exclusive’ post and reward us for our efforts, no matter what the content. However, they don’t do that. So, I don’t think it is fair to be asking for ‘Exclusive’. I tried doing ‘Exclusives’ a couple of times. I gave up when I found that it didn’t mean a thing to anybody.
In the real world, when an editor ask you for an 'exclusive' it means you sold your rights to the article to them. That article is now theirs and you cannot sell, or publish it anywhere else. Of course, you are handsomely rewarded for your efforts. :-)
0.00 SBD,
17.63 STEEM,
17.63 SP
That indeed is what exclusive means to me. I do understand the the idea, why SCs shouldn't upvote but it is like you state: it means nothing to anyone and no matter what you share it feels like a waste.
0.00 SBD,
0.00 STEEM,
0.35 SP
🍀❤️
@wakeupkitty
0.00 SBD,
0.00 STEEM,
0.33 SP
Thank you for that. Have a great weekend!
Couldn't have said it any better myself 💯
0.00 SBD,
0.15 STEEM,
0.15 SP
Thanks! 😊
Estoy de acuerdo con este argumento.
Hmm, so my interpretation of steemexclusive is that it is, as the name suggests, exclusive.
As soon as I publish an identical post elsewhere, it is no longer exclusive, whether before or after, it doesn't matter.
Ultimately, it is my free decision whether I use the tag or not.
And, of course, content from free sources may also be included, provided that it is marked as such.
Regarding AI content: as far as I have been able to ascertain, it has no owner, simply because machines cannot own property. Copyright does not exist for machines.
AI content can therefore be used freely by anyone. This is usually the case, but the operators of the AI software may have regulated it differently, so you cannot always rely on general rules. That is what I have been able to find out.
0.00 SBD,
0.17 STEEM,
0.17 SP
Here you talk about humans using AI content freely but AI takes the content of humans first ...and indeed for machines copyright doesn't exist but that doesn't mean for its owners (those who created AI). I am sure they won't like it if anyone steals their idea.
0.00 SBD,
0.00 STEEM,
1.14 SP
I'll tell you what I think. I want to progress, regardless of the price of Steem. I keep working because cryptocurrencies are very volatile. There's something called conscience. When we do things right, we don't have any guilt. When we do the opposite, it obviously appears. We can deceive others, but never ourselves. Each individual decides; it's called free will. You decide if you're on the side of good or evil, obviously without ceasing to be yourself. Let me explain: I have a lot of faith in God, but this doesn't mean I'll let others walk all over me.
0.00 SBD,
0.16 STEEM,
0.16 SP
I believe conscious doesn't speak the same language to everyone, the same counts if it comes to guilt. Some always feel guilty, to others guilty doesn't exist.
I am not sure if having faith in God goes hand in hand with letting others walk over you. Also without faith this is possible. Education, how you've been raised, grew up and character are the total that turn people into ...?
To me the most important is to stay true to myself. That is my conscious.
❤️🍀
0.00 SBD,
0.04 STEEM,
0.04 SP
(I believe conscious doesn't speak the same language to everyone) I totally agree with you
"accounts in power-down are nominated and rewarded by SC01".....why? It shouldn’t be allowed.....
Because it is apparantly not checked or believed it was or? Your guess is as good as mine
0.00 SBD,
0.00 STEEM,
0.07 SP
I'm still drafting my response for the daily prompt, and I'm trying to explore this idea as well. I'm finding it hard to phrase, but I agree that there are things that we created is inspired by something else.
I'll comment tomorrow. My mind isn't clear right now.
Mañana comentaré. A esta hora no tengo la mente fresca.