You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Voting Test - Do You Think Changing to a Flattened Curve Is Urgent?
Downvoting belongs to the Steemit logic such as upvoting does. The only thing that hopefully will change over time is how downvotes are perceived by users. Ideally as something quite normal to occur and nothing to be upset about.
I'm not for downvoting or flaging, but if has to exist the the downvoter/flagger must comment and state the reasons why. This way he/she is risking to be downvoted for the comment.
I think the downvotes are confusing. Is it a dislike or is it flag for breaking the laws/rules? Why isn't it separated into a downvote = dislike and a flag = bad actions?
I disagree. Even @ned wrote almost a year ago that downvoting should be reserved for blatantly negative posts or spam. It's hilarious to wait for people to accept negativity, instead of listening to them and eliminate it. What happened with "the client is right" thing? Here's what @ned said about downvoting a year ago.
Everyone accepts that downvotes cause negativity and problems. But nobody has been able to effectively argue against the cases where they are genuinely necessary, including where reward allocation is concerned.
Those who are campaigning against downvotes are getting nowhere because they are failing to convince people that they're not necessary for reducing over-allocation of rewards. Right now the downvote has been applied so liberally that it has effectively enforced a flatter rewards curve and demonstrated exactly that problem, resulting in greater engagement over recent days (posts and comments have spiked, even accounting for bots).
If you oppose downvotes, the best case you can make is to minimize their use. Harm reduction is generally better than prohibition and arguing to deny stakeholders their right to have their say. Here is my proposal which I think can virtually eliminate the impetus to use a 'rewards allocation' downvote:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@demotruk/up-and-down-votes-are-a-big-part-of-the-problem-on-steemit
Coincidentally, I wrote Down-votes: Steemit's Achilles' Heel? within a day or so before "the experiment" was announced.
While I remain neutral on "the experiment" itself, I do think that it proved the larger point that the downvote represents a major threat to the platform, because it can be used by a hostile entity, such as a well-funded competitor or state actor to severely disrupt and erode the user base. Imagine the negative impact that the experiment would have if abit and smooth were whales with harmful intentions, and weren't "pulling their punches."
If downvotes are necessary, then I think steemit's growth potential is perpetually limited to the footprint that its competitors will tolerate.
I would support something along the lines of your median proposal, although I think it may need to be modified from its current form to be compatible with the blockchain.
While downvoting is perceived as a flag and rightly so as it is refereed to by the system as such, and constantly refereed by the community as downvote, it will garner all the negative attention associated to flagging, and act as a confusion and misunderstanding primer. It's kinda a flag but it acts as a downvote with the power to also hide content, not just decrease rewards based on VP and SP. Downvote and flagging should be two different systems, flagging is for abuse and flag abuse, and that should be equal in power across the board, and the current flagging should just share a place next to the upvote as a downvote and it should be much more draining on voting power, as a means to balance it out and de-incentivize abuse and then remove it's ability to hide posts and give the new flagging function that ability and also to negatively affect the reputation, as well as allow for flags themselves to be flagged, and if there is a consensus of 2 or more affect the reputation of the flagger, as to stop sybil attacks with flags peg the flagging ability to a good reputation score that can be achieved by new users, maybe 50ish.
As for downvoting being used for purely negative posts or spam it's clear that those parameters have changed considerably as it is explicit in the very first reason it lists when you hit the flag/downvote button and I quote:
A lot has been learned in a year. Too much reluctance to downvote is also bad for system as a whole, at least under the current ruleset.
The downvote started to be used in an abusive way just 2-3 months ago. You being one of the most prominent downvoters here. I don't see how this equals as "a lot being learned". People are leaving because of this. People are the flesh and blood of this product. No people = no product. Simple.