RE: Negative Voting and Steem
Yeah, it deserves to be downvoted, if you agree with the idea that people should be worried about counteracting other people's votes (or bots), instead of just enjoying curating content or coming up with ideas on how to make bots that are good for everyone.
Then you have your comment ... is it really worth over $11? I dunno. Maybe relative to the OP. But in general, probably not.
I think limitations such as voting power and having to worry about what other people are voting up kinda ruins things.
What if votes and pending payouts were hidden, encrypted, and only revealed at payout time? The game would change completely. Remove the voting power penalties, or at least reduce the penalty a lot, to allow people to vote freely, up or flag down.
Bots would gain nothing by autovoting except in cases where they autovote based on past earnings (i.e. have an author's list). Those author lists, across bots, will eventually be virtually identical and make the pie seem kinda small, until each bot is making so little it's eventually not worth it, so the number of bots doing certain kinds of autovoting will stabilize and their will be far less possible exploits.
What are the negatives of hiding the votes and pending payout amounts until after payout time?
There is a large growing group of us that believe payout time is the only time a post should reveal its value, even if it is only on the GUI. But encrypting it on the chain could work too!
If all posts are seen as equal in value (no value shown), they are more likely to receive proper curation.
While a post is going viral with popularity, I don't want to see if it is at $1.21 or $1,532 because I know a lot of less knowledgable curators are going to chase the $1,532 post, and ignore the $1.21 one simply by glancing at the current $ value as a sole indicator.
Allow the user to show the value or not. Should be an option.