You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Is this Quality Knowledge I Put Out Not Helpful to Steemit? Flagged for Quality Getting Rewarded?
It's a free market, people can do as they please. It was just a single flag, but I can understand you're upset because it was a very influential stakeholder and cost you a not insignificant amount in rewards.
I feel negative opinion is just as healthy as positive - one of the reasons why Reddit has been so successful. Unfortunately, the flag is a poor metaphor; probably riles up anarchy folks here too due to the subconscious association with governments and authorities.
I am aware there was a Downvote icon before - would rather just have that back. People would still be upset, but it's healthy for the community - particularly once influence tokens are more justly redistributed.
Agree. I always thought the icon change was harmful.
I thing all will be solved if we have both icons/options in existence ! .... BUT >>>>>>>
1.When pushing "flag" it should get a hardcoded -100% downvote
2.When pushing the down arrow it get a hardcoded -20% downvote!
PS When the downvote is -20% don't let the reputation algorithm apply (No impact) ;)
Actually it doesn’t need to get hard-coded! Each social media can have their own strategy on that matter!
I can agree with your thinking here to some degree, hence the upvote.
But it seems to me that users would still be able to create multiple accounts, likely bots, to downvote as much as they liked no matter what.
Until this can be stopped, if it can ever be stopped, the hardcoded votes won't be of much help I think.
PS I'm not sure I understand your comment now... especially since the PS. Can you expand on this idea?
I wrongly thought that reputation goes down when reducing rewards and the down voter has more reputation, but that is not correct (@smooth explained )... It happens only if rewards fall bellow zero... But still I think leaving 2 options with different % down votes will make the trick... It doesn't matter if someone has one or many accounts... Total SP matters
Maybe one option would be a form of downvote that reduces reward and reputation to zero (but not negative). That is, not expressing an opinion that the post or poster is harming the platform (and should there lose rep), but instead expressing one that the post or poster is not helping or not helping proportionately with what would otherwise be the reward payout (and should not gain or should gain less rep)
Oh right... I guess that's a good idea then. I'm very positive to it.
What about a system where downvotes/flags don't actually have an effect on anything until you get 5 of them, then you get the weight of all 5 plus any after that?
It is easy to create multiple accounts and vote multiple times. There are already people who have thousands of accounts and bots to control them. That is the nature of a decentralized system.
Nesting again... I also very much like the idea you put forward downstairs, under liondanis answer to me.
You sir, have raised a good point.
Nope, do it to the less significant, less quality, less original post on cannabis that got 2x the payout than my original HQ work. Not to this work which is timeless knowledge that simple minded people can't comprehend its value and flag it for getting too much rewards.
Go flag other people who get more rewards than me each day they post with one one single long post. Where are these "long-post-reward-watchers" with their flags on those people for posting once a day yet always going to the top of the trending page, while I don't? LMAO. Hypocrisy, lies, deception. I don't see them getting flagged. People like smooth need to stop being bullshitters.
Like I said, this is a free market. Free markets do not reward quality - they reward popularity.
It was popular too and HQ. Yes, downgrading HQ posts is going to help ANY organization thumbs up. A good message to send. Awesome.
In extension of many parameters, they actually end up rewarding both. But I see your point.
The arrogance that seeps out of that statement almost makes me want to put my puny little flag on. That aside, your post is quality to you and to those who agree. To others, they may not agree. That is their right. Other people see quality in posts you, or I, consider to be garbage. That is the nature of the system.
Without making a statement on the quality, or lack of quality of the post, I disagree with smooth's action because I have always taken the stance that the flag should be an item of censure not simply disagreement or displeasure.
What @smooth has done here is no different than what your friend @beanz has advocated repeatedly that the flag aka downvote can and should be used for. Reflecting the value of the post. You've agreed with her argument until it applies to you? Is that not a hypocrisy?
What applies to the smallest on the system, applies to the largest. So, if you want to use the flag as a downvote, then the whales doing so is just as valid as a minnow like me. The action has greater impact coming from a whale than me but is just as valid.
Community of all types is both messy and fascinating.
arrogance: "to claim for oneself, assume,"
Did I falsely claim something about myself? No, I was talking about the content, whether this content that comes from me, or other content that comes from others, there is HQ timeless immensely valuable knowledge out there.
Did I falsely claim something about the work? No, but you seem to think I did.
Arrogance is to make a claim and assume something you don't have. If you have it, it's not arrogance, although it can be boastful, prideful, etc. And that's a bad thing, for stating things as they are and people not liking the frank, bold, telling of it like it is? Ha! There is timeless knowledge and some people can't comprehend it's value in their unconscious state of awareness.
If someone isn't able of objectively discerning the relevance and value of knowledge in life, that's not my shortcoming as a false claim in arrogance, that's their own problem to not recognize it. I don't claim "timeless knowledge" about the work falsely. When someone can't recognize the value of knowledge in life, then yes, they are simple-minded because they aren't at a position to be able to discern relevant valuable information in their lives.
Flag way, have fun. The issue is about flagging HQ posts, that I make. Other people, make long posts, that get rewarded each day, and they post once, and always get to the top, while I do it a few times and I'm the target for the HQ post, not the other lesser posts like on cannabis. Go flag that instead, not this HQ knowledge. I support flagging to reduce rewards, as long as there is a valid reason, like shit content or repetitive top 7 trending each time I would post... then OK there is an issue. But flagging for my first HQ post to make it to the top 7 and over $100... wow. Yes, that will surely help any platform by downgrading the top quality content that a organization produces. That will show everyone what is valued here. Awesome.
Actually, I used both in the original comment. Appears to me that you are the one who truly 'doesn't get it'. No matter how much YOU wish to be the definer of what is a 'crap post' and what is not, YOU ARE NOT the definer. YOU are not THE ONE who gets to decide value.
YOU can decide for yourself what is crap and what has value. OTHERS will make their own choices and this time SOMEONE decided that it should apply to YOU.
What you believe is just for others, must also be applicable to you. IF when it is applied to YOU, you see injustice, then MAYBE you need to rethink your argument.
LMAO, let's see, you focus in on the first sentence that YOU THINK you can dissect and dismantle and ignore that you were being called out on your hypocrisy in regards to flagging and post value. YES, such timeless posting will surely solve all the problems of the site.
Like I said, what applies to the smallest on the system applies to the largest as well. If it's okay to flag to redistribute rewards it applies to you as much as to others and whales have the same right to do that flagging as puny little me. I don't agree with using the flag for that purpose but when you think it is okay, be prepared to accept it when it happens to you.
LMAO back at you. Like I said elsewhere in other comments, flag the cannabis post, ok, I was actually expecting it. But it didn't happen. And instead, the real meaningful post gets flagged. Seems this issue is being missed and people think it's just about the "me" getting my post getting flagged. Nope. You just "don't get it".
You don't understand the meaning of words you use, yet again. Before I was "arrogant", now I'm a "hypocrite" even though I have stated consistent criteria for flagging to remove rewards: crap posts and people who always get to the top of the trending, no matter what they post. Yet, those who claim that to be the "long-post police" are not flagging posts that make more than me, each day, from the same people, and get to the top of the trending page. Why is that? That's called hypocrisy. Inconsistent behavior, selective application of methodology to favor others (well basically long-post trending is OK but me?). I don't pretend to be something I'm not.
Flag the cannabis post at nearly $200, not this one at $100. Redistribute the rewards on the posts that don't deserve it, i.e. cannabis post vs. this one. Use rational judgment.
I can't agree more my friend!
Don't worry, the-alien's posts are on my short list as well. I'm not on a flagging rampage where I will downvote these things every single time, but I will do it selectively where I disagree about the rewards (and the value they bring or don't bring to stakeholders) and swarm voting.