What keeps you from using your daily free downvotes?
What keeps you from using your daily free downvotes?
Please use the opportunity to further elaborate on your answers. I'm very interested in your opinion. I will distribute a total of 5 SBD among the most insightful comments on the matter. Thank you!
- I find it already difficult enough to allocate my daily quota of upvotes.
- It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate.
- Disagreeing with too high rewards just isn't mine.
- I'm certain it would be the right thing to do, but using them just feels so unpleasant.
- I would, but I'm afraid of retaliatory downvotes.
- Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
- Free downvotes? I didn't know there was such a thing.
- Other reasons (please explain)
Answer the question at dpoll.xyz.
Voted for
I'm not a confrontational person. I think downvotes are important as a corrective to some abuses, just as I think a police force in necessary in society. But I make a terrible police officer. It would ruin Steem for me to get involved in disputes. This is irresponsible, leaving the policing to others, but each of us has to operate in our comfort zone. So I try to do other good things on the platform. I guess that's a combination of several of your options.
Thank you for your comment.
First of all, I can relate very well with how you feel. At this stage of the adoption of #newsteem it still often is an unpleasant experience to disagree with rewards towards the lower end. And I can understand if someone decides to not get exposed to the disappointment, the dispute and sometimes the rage that gets triggered thereby. But what to do if one is convinced that the reward allocation can't be a one-way road towards higher payouts. And that the absence of downvotes would immediately bring back the broken economy where one could send 1 Steem to an address just to get a guaranteed 1.15 Steem back. We have been there, it wasn't viable.
Having said that, you really should continue using Steem as it feels right and enjoyable for you. We will get nowhere if Steem can't be the place for exactly that for most of it's users. In the best case, however, distributing and receiving downvotes will not be anything that will interfere with the pleasure of beeing a Steemian, but will be part of the normal experience.
Hi Shaka
Thank you for that clear explanation. I respect the good intentions and rationale behind New Steem. Thanks for understanding my way forward here. I hope the next few months bring a resurgence in activity and renewed confidence in the platform. I'm certainly going to try and be a positive influence in my small corner of the Steem universe.
Thank you, @shaka!
I'd be fine with a police force.
Moderators/witnesses downvoting makes sense to me, but there should be some kind of transparent appeals process.
What we have now is VIGILANTISM.
In other words, SCHOOL-YARD-BULLIES.
Voted for
Hello @shaka :)
This is an interesting discussion to have. It's nice to have the opportunity to talk about downvotes and read the position of others here on your comment feed.
I could address each of the points you raised, but I decided to go for a brief (er) reply, elaborating only on those aspects I find more relevant for me.
I find it already difficult enough to allocate my daily quota of upvotes.
When spending time on the platform, I prefer to encourage those community members who enjoy blogging and are dedicated to what they do here, than to punish those who don't. I suppose it's because it's also beneficial for me. For example, I get to read interesting write-ups, learn new things, get to see cool artworks and so forth.
Downvotes are fundamentally wrong.
I don't think downvotes are fundamentally wrong. But, free-downvotes are. Punishment that comes with no cost to the 'punisher' paves the way for vindictive behaviour. If a group puts a punishment system in place, it must be one that comes with a cost to that who punishes (especially on a community like Steemit). Than, it is more likely that it will be carried out for the greater good of the group (altruistic punishment), than just as a mere act of vengeance.
Hi Abigail,
thank you for joining the poll and for sharing your take on the matter.
Your judgement on allowing free downvotes appears logical under your premise that they are an instrument of punishment. My understanding of downvotes, however, is fundamentally different. Let me try to explain.
Downvotes express the request of a stakeholder to correct the current proposal for the reward of a contribution. Just like an upvote does. When someone hits the publish button on Steem, the community of stakeholders is called to review and modify a constantly changing proposal for the reward of that post. This review goes on over a period of 7 days and it deals with nothing else but a proposal. There is nothing to give, nothing to take, nothing to reward, nothing to punish. It’s just collecting stake-weighted input to come up with a final consensus on what the actual payout should be. No one should feel entitled to receive what a proposal suggests at any time within this 7d period. Because it’s subject to change until it’s final.
Now, to engage in this review stakeholders have only three possibilities to express their view. Upvote, Downvote and No vote. And now I get to the point. What happens to this review if one expression comes at a cost while another doesn’t? In other words, how will the outcome of this review change if one as to pay for saying „less“ while getting payed for saying „more“. No way this could work out. And we were all able to convince ourselves for a long time that it didn’t.
Even now after the introduction of the EIP these three ways to engage in the reward proposal review are incentivized differently, since only one of them offers curation rewards. Still, taking away at least the penalty on the downvote has gone a long way towards improving reward evaluation and thus content discovery.
Reintroducing a cost on downvotes will again take them out of the set of expressions we have in said review and would turn our shared community pool back into the self-service shop it was for a too long time.
Needless to say that the above is all my personal take on the matter. Thanks again for sharing yours.
(I take the liberty of tagging a few of the other commenters here, since what I wrote here might be an adequate response to their input too.
@don-t @roleerob @xpilar @ianballantine @flysky @siphon @wulff-media @purplealyss @cflclosers @lighteye @gamemods @suntree @agmoore @gunnarheilmann)
Thank you @shaka for this explanation of your thoughts about this issue, I mostly agree with you, but as long as bots and voting-trails do this jobs (it doesn´t matter if in positive or negative way) it is unacceptable because it also leads to abuse.
This has happened in the last few weeks.
It can't be that it's allowed to automate something like this, especially if the accounts with the most power are trying to play the regulators on both sides.
This clearly shows again the biggest system error on Steemit, the missing balance between 1Mio SP and 10, 100 or 1000SP.
Even if I take your example from our conversation where it was said that many small accounts together also reach an respectable SP, so I must admit with a little distance that exactly the same is true for the large accounts so the mismatch can be very easily restored.
There would have to be a ban which limits e.g. a delegation basically to a maximum of 100K SP, so that these pool formations would be extremely difficult to establish and thus the abuse almost excluded completely in contrast to the current state.
It is bad enough if an account with a SP power of more than 500k or 1 Mio decides to vote a contribution down because he does not like it or he thinks it would be overvalued, this can not be corrected, there is no regulative for it.
So in order to make this community one under equal, a few rules should be changed in the interest of all.
And only then steemit and steem might finally be able to raise and play out their enormous potential, also for the benefit of all members of this incredible community.
Guess that´s the goal to fight for, nothing else is worth it isn´t it ?
Good afternoon @shaka,
Thank you for taking the time to share your views here with me/us :) I found it very insightful and it has definitely provided me with a different angle from which to approach this topic.
Best,
Abigail.
I should have used one on your post here, which is (at the time of my looking at it) totally overvalued already. However, who am I to piss on 270+ people who have decided that your post is worth something to them. So here is your answer: I reject downvotes on principle, because they spread nothing but negativity. If I don't like something I move on and upvote something else. Live and let live.
If by some miracle I should get a share of those 5 SBD for my "great insight" I ask you to donate it to whichever charity you deem worthy. Perhaps as a last hoorah to @nosdos which was ruined by the current downvote culture...
Hi Folker
Thanks for showing up and commenting!
If you consider this post to be overvalued I'd like to encourage you to downvote it accordingly. And don't assess longer as you usually do before you upvote a post wich you consider undervalued. I would take your downvote as nothing else but another stakeholder exerting his influence on how to allocate from our shared reward pool. Steem won't have a sustainable economy if there isn't a sufficient number of stakeholders who assume their ownership of the Steem inflation and actively manage its distribution based on their subjective judgement. Having the possibility to counter the assessment made by others is inevitable to make all of this work, no matter how many stakeholders came to an assessment different from yours. If you just move on to upvote another post it means that you limit your influence to distribute what others left for you to distribute.
If you are interested you can read more about my view on downvotes in my reply to Abigail. I took the liberty to tag you there.
I consider it overvalued, not worthless. So I gave you a token +1%, if I remember correctly. A recent post of @therealwolf I had found vastly overvalued and abusive to boot, so he got -100% including an explanatory comment. I understand how it works. BTW, he told me to get a life or something and proceeded to mute my comment into oblivion, like I was any old troll. Win some, lose some...
I know that and trust it. In fact, I honestly believe that many "old" Steemians would see it exactly the same way, a few assholes notwithstanding. To me, the revenge downvotes per se are not the big problem, but I reject downvoting on principle as I don't like negativity.
If I don't upvote a post it's a judgement on my part that said post is worthless to me and only to me. I don't feel I have a right to take away from those who upvoted the post, i.e. they found it valuable to them. I consider the logic behind downvoting re. shared pool, sustainability, re-allocation, etc. utterly flawed. If it were such a good thing it would be self evident and didn't have to be defended tooth and nails by those who advocate it.
Example: If I see a beggar in the street I don't give them any money. Here in Germany, this person only needs to go to the welfare office and will be helped generously, probably that very day. So I don't attribute any social value to this person's begging and have better ideas how the money in their hat should be used. However, I don't punch them in the face, tell them what worthless human trash they are, and proceed to steal their hat with the cash to "reallocate" it. THIS IS EXACTLY HOW I FEEL ABOUT DOWNVOTES. (Not the nuissance-troll-asshole ones, those are best ignored.)
An aside: I'm not that heartless. I DO give money to street musicians because I appreciate their performance (upvote!) and to beggars with dogs, because they have a hard time getting help in homeless shelters or finding social housing with the animal. (Hence the passion re. @nosdos.) Anyway, different subject...
If Steem is not sustainable without downvotes maybe there shouldn't be a Steem. (Cases of outright plagiarism, reward pool rape, etc. notwithstanding.) That greed is a problem is also well established. Funny, the greedy ones often are the biggest downvote advocates... I feel that sustainability could be reached if we came to a culture where upvotes, especially big ones, aren't given so easily and downvotes the weapon of last resort to combat outright abuse.
I understand the sustainability issue somewhat, thanks to @penguinpablo (the data guy) who was nice enough to explain it to me. Maybe I'm wrong, but we don't need to rehash that stuff. I don't like the current culture here, and I'm on my way out because #newsteem took away the "visibility on demand" that was valuable to me, without providing an adequate replacement.
@wulff-media Some accounts with high SP seem to exist only to use their power to heavily downvote those they hate (for whatever reason) - and one (or more, like maybe same guy with several accounts) I am aware of seems to be a stalking troll who does not post himself at all, but just uses his big SP to downvote. Giving haters (that can afford to invest large amounts in Steem) that much power without any kind of checks and balances can also damage this platform.
The incidences of heavy weighted downvotes I am aware of are seemingly politically (and perhaps also racist) motivated actions by one (or more?) ultra-right-wing actors.
... It takes too much time for me to find posts where I consider a downvote to be appropriate ... this is almost the answer ... because is no so much matter of time ... is more a difficulty to decide that something deserves a downvote ... even if I see something that is overrated in my opinion, then at the second look, I start to think that if somebody really likes this kind of stuff - well, let it be ... the only posts I will gladly and with no problem downvote are the ones with clear plagiarism ... but I didn't come across one of those yet ... and I have a bit a problem of time in general, there is always something to do and I don't explore contents of Steemit as I would like to because I'm obsessed with daily posting, so there is not much time left to explore other people's work ... maybe in winter that will be possible ... if it will be a winter this year :) for now, it is just a strange extended summer with shorter days ...
Hello @shaka, this is an interesting question.
Before I answer, I want to say that the availability of free downvote is a very good thing in my opinion. even more so at the current steem condition. downvote needs to be done for those who abuse. such as copy paste on posts, and for those who continue to rape the pool of steem prizes.
before the harfock, I saw many users who raped the steem prize pool. in a day they made so many posts. and they also don't vote for others. they only vote for themselves.
of course this will make steem more hurt. and after the harfock, they were turned off and now stopped raping the prize pool.
now only 1 user remains who continues to rape the steem prize pool. he has considerable strength. until now the journey is very smooth. there hasn't been a single whale that has given him a downvote.
and now downvote is also done for users using bid bot services. I totally agree with this. Unlike before Harfock, only a few words users can place their posts on trending. in my opinion it really looks like rubbish.
In my opinion, the reason for free downvotes is to make prices better. and prevent unqualified posts from getting high marks.
however, it's a pity, now downvote is not only for those who cheat. but downvote is also used to limit the amount of payment posts. I totally disagree with this. in my opinion this is the same as taking the rights of others who have painstakingly made quality posts.
what makes me not use downvote every day?
I am happy with the availability of free downvote, and I really want to do it with cheating users. but I did not dare. The reason is because I have very little strength. for another reason, I'm afraid of revenge.
Posted using Partiko Android
I'm glad you're asking these questions @shaka
I hope you get many answers for this is something everyone should make their opinion on in the community on this platform.
I am not opposed to red flags / downvote if they are just used properly, but I believe that a warning should first be in place with a yellow flag that describes the problem of fighting spam / plagiarism and fraud.
In my 3 years at steemit I have given many a warning and explained where I do it. Several of them did not realize it was wrong and have thanked for it afterwards for guidance and some of them have also become my friends here at Steemit. It is useful to talk to people, not just give them a flag / dwonvote and then they just sit there as a question
We must be able to teach to others before we punish, so that everyone gets a chance to grow on this platform
Some of the ugliness that happens here is now revenge with flag / downvote
Small accounts are also downvote for no reason because of many other small accounts that are only active when down voting.
Am afraid someone has a different agenda than what flag / downvote is meant for. Looks like they don't want new Steemit accounts
I think all this has to be done in a more correct way, as we are now creating a huge war on the platform and more and more are becoming enemies instead of friends
My suggestion for the next Hardfork is
The use of downvote / flagging cannot come until you give a factual reason with warning. And the warnings should then come with a yellow flag
If the warnings are not heeded, it will be possible next time to give the red flag, but even then it must be described why the red flag comes.
Voted for
Voted for
I will elaborate on my vote in comments on your post.
Well ... Great, I did not know how dpoll works obviously. I have written my comment further down ...
#sbi-skip
Wenn es wirklich was downzuvoten gibt dann bin ich dabei und habe auch schon wie gestern das letzte mal geschehen.
Resteemed :-)