Crypto & Cardio #5 - Mo' complexity, mo' problems (Account Based vs Stake Weighed voting)
Over the last couple of days, the merits (or otherwise) of Account-based voting have come onto my radar. In today’s video I talk about Account Based voting, Stake-weighted voting, the challenges of both dealing with bad actors and rewarding ‘high quality’ content.
Thank the Birds!
First of thanks @steembirds for your comment. It was the first thing I saw when I checked my phone this morning and brought a huge smile on my face.
More into the mix
As I understand it the Steemit Team are looking at ways in which Account-based voting and Oracles can be used to enhance the SMT offering, when it arrives. My overriding feeling is… let SMTs and Communities arrive already!
Wisdom of ….
However indulging the subject for just a moment though… I think relying on “the Wisdom-of-the-Crowd in order to unearth high quality content and give it public exposure” can, for the most part, turn out to be a fools errand.
The Wisdom of the Crowd is useful when trying to come to a consensus of a matter of fact (‘Who won the Super Bowl in 2017?’) or even, if the crowd has something at stake, to help predict an outcome ('Who will win the 2018 World Cup?).
However trying to get a (nothing-at-stake) Crowd (in the case of STEEMs 1A1V) to assess what is ‘high quality’ content and reward appropriately seems to me a step too far. At best, the crowd will tell you what is popular not much more. Instagram and it’s Insta-famous models are testament to that!
What constitute quality
Not to mention the age old question of what constitutes quality, as we know it's subjective.
Who is better, Jordan or LeBron?, Who is worth more LeBron or Messi?, Who provides better quality LeBron or Beyonce?
How much is a 'quality' painting vs a meme vs a vlog vs a piece of music vs a news article vs a scientific paper vs an insightful comment worth?
Gamers gonna game
Over and above "inaccurate" assessments of quality, the real issue around stake-weighed voting is combating people using large stakes to game rewards.
I don’t think I know of a single walk of life where there aren’t people how try to game the system. Whether it’s in financial markets or a sports field, a casino or a school playground.
People try and do game "the system".
Stake-weighed voting on STEEM is no different in that regard. People today are trying to use their Stake (or stake they've bought) to milk the rewards pool. It should in theory be a self-defeating exercise. Large stake holders ‘should’ be better served by growing the platform and the value of stake over the long term, over the yield of draining the rewards pool. Also other large stakeholders should also be incentivised to mitigate a bad actor by countering their vote.
In practice however, bad actors milk the rewards pool whilst relying on others to grow the platform. And policing bad actors is both time-consuming and burdensome. I spoken before about how I feel Communities and a Steam-Cleaning Community could address this in a more sophisticated way than can be done now. I also think that Communities can help identify (thus reward) ‘Quality Content’ more easily. However that is a conversation for another time.
In time... yes
I do think Oracles and Account-based voting have a role in STEEM/ SMTs. For example, I run the Soccer Sweepstakes Competition. It would be great to leverage Oracle information to help ensure that every contestant was indeed an individual.
However we should be prepared for Oracles and Account-based voting to be gamed. E.g. people signing up their aunt, uncle, mother and granddad to gain more '1A1V' voting power. These features will not be a panacea for all ills of today.
Mo' complexity, mo' problems
Throwing Oracles and Account-based voting in the mix will enhance definitely the options on offer for SMTs. However this will come with its own baggage and challenges; at a time where there is a a lot that can be done (with the existing voting system) to improve the quality-to-reward ratio.
Rant over!
My video is at DLive
It would indeed be nice to know if someone is genuine or not!
Still curious how this account based voting will work. Probably this also will have flaws which will be exploited. But doing / changing nothing will probably be worse.
For me, the only indication is a post has value is the interaction on it. The more interaction there is, the more people are involved in it!
One can argue about the content but quality of content has a very broad spectrum.
Take for instance your sweep stake. Lots of comments on that post. We could argue about the quality of the content, which probably would be less compared with an in-depth article about a certain topic (no offense). But if the in-depth article only has 1 comment and the sweepstake has 300+. The sweepstake article could have more value because it offers a platform to interact with each other!
Cheers,
Peter
I think interaction is a good indicator. However I've noticed that people try to "game" interaction as well with fake comments etc.
It is tough because whether it's account based, stake based or interactive based, a qualitative assessment is needed to determine whether someone is genuine or trying to game the system for financial rewards. It's always going to be an imprecise science.
I like the premise of stake-weighted voting because the community members who are most invested in the success of the platform have the most influence over that assessment. If they get it wrong, it's there investment on the line.
I am only around here since Jan of this year. So still lots to learn and don't know the solution either. But no matter what solution it will be, people will find some mazes in the net and still will game the system. Only because money is involved!
We are now 2 months far with our Steem Sport Betting Community (@sbcbot) and I did underestimate how much time and effort it costs to set up a community full of genuine people. We are trying to educate them regarding steem, the quality of posting and trying to give them a push in the back! And we do see that some even there are trying to game the system. People now knowing what sports betting is, are trying to get an upvote from the bot. It is good that they have to get whitelisted to score upvotes.
What also bothers me, is that lots of the newcomers are only interested in interacting with the founders and not their peers, while this is our ultimate goal. But since this week we are seeing some changes and it is great to see that the discord channel is more lively everyday!
So, yes communities could be a future. But a community only gives the people a platform to interact with each other and to find peers. It is up to the community members who they use it!
Thanks for the reply.
Cheers,
Peter
It is still a pretty extensive topic that will need some more videos to clarify doubts and ask other questions
Agreed, there are lots of layers to this. I'd like to see how it plays out when SMTs arrive.
I think the stake-weighted voting aspect is part of the genius of the Steemit platform. That is really "where the money comes from". If people weren't incentivised to invest in Steemit, there wouldn't be any crypto rewards - or what rewards there are would be worthless. There is potential for big investors to disrupt the system, but the potential disruption and corruption with content arbitrators, whether elected or selected, would be much, much worse, in my opinion. I personally think that would be the death-knell for Steemit!
I agree, stake-weighed voting is one of Steem's key selling points.
A bad actor would have to purchase an insane amount of Steem (and put a lot at stake) to cause disruption. And even then other Steem holders can get together to negative the bad actors influence.
Gaming an Account based system is easier, less costly (in my view).
We'll see how it plays out if there is a successful SMT that is account-based. From what I understand Steem will remain stake-weighted, which is a good thing.
I’d like to thank you for having me on your voting visit and believing in my content provided to the community . There’s just so much going on with the release of EOS, SMT and now even Steem monsters . So your statement of “ Mo complexity , Mo problems “ fits perfect
You're most welcome! 👍
Crypto & Cardio EP 5 I am already addicted from Episode 1. Sooooo Goooood!
I love the concept!! If I try to do "Crypto & Filming " I can hurt my self cause I cant see where I am walking watching thru the monitor of my video camera ! jejejee
Congrats and thanks for the inspiration @nanzo-scoop
Thanks @rod.crisafulli - Crypto & Film sounds like a plan. I'm certainly up for doing a collaboration... my camera work leaves a lot to be desired!!😆
Brother @nanzo- scoop, I think the users of steemit to watch other users will always be difficult ,if there is anything unwanted on steemit, the management should technically stop it, and that will be the end of the story.
The community is the management. The Steemit might hold the most tokens and influence but ultimately the platform belongs to us all.
That beats the purpose of decentralization.
One of the most beautiful things about steemit is that's it governed by the community.
Steemians get to decide what's right and wrong for the platform.
If the management gets too involved we could degrade to dangerous levels of censorship.
Agreed. If there were a way to make Steemit totally decentralized like Diaspora that would be amazing.
Thats is the picture most of us have in our minds, but the real idea have not been practiced yet.
For example , if that idea had been in practice none of the groups such as minnows, bots and others would have been existing here.
They exist due to that idea not being into practice. Because new users were complaining alot for their post not being upvoted, read or commented by any. There were old users who were only curating each other. They didnt bother about that idea of decentralization, in order new users to survive , new developments of groups and bots happened.
That's human society for you.
We always find a way to filter ourselves into social strata.
If you look at things you'll see that steemit is like a nation.
So the time will tell, the number of steemit users is increasing , you will understand later when number of users are more then 5-10 ml. Good day!
People are people.
They'll find a way to expliot whatever new system that's implemented.
You're absolutely right. More complexity equals more problems.
Good video and music.
With respect to the big picture I generally agree with you on this issue. However quality content is not incentivized by the way that whales and voting bots can game the system. IHMO I would cap the ability of whales to vote for the same people and themselves and "encourage" them to delegate some SP to programs that encourage new users to contribute content.
Hello friend when contest again