You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: I submitted my first hardfork pull request to the Steem blockchain! (Updates to the SBD print rate.)
Hi @timcliff,
thanks for contributing code to the Steem project - I cannot agree more on your blog that we need many more freelancing developer in order to become more independent from Steemit, Inc.
If you REALLY have some spare time for another pull request, you could look into this Steem protocol improvement proposal here:
https://steemit.com/utopian-io/@steemhq/how-to-make-steem-great-again-the-exponential-author-reward-method
I really think this could be a game changer for Steem and could fix a lot of problems we currently see on the platform.
I have seen the proposal, and am not really in favor of the change. I do not believe in "punishing success" which is basically what it does to posts that are receiving a high payout, and for users who are interested in extracting the maximum amount of rewards - it will just push them to split their content into as many posts/comments as possible, and upvoting all of the smaller items. TLDR: lots more spam.
Kudos on the discussion of moving needed changes faster via other stakeholders than Steemit Inc.!
However, do you have any thoughts as to how to improve the current situation where low-quality content often gets many multiples of the rewards of high quality content, simply on the basis of the longevity or steem power of the author? Our retention rate and percentage of quality posts MUST be improved if we are to succeed long term.
The short answer: downvoting. This area is probably where I will put my attention next after I complete the other SBD change.
Cool! So glad that your antenanne are stright up on these issues, as well.
I would be worried about a thousand downvoting wars breaking out, though...but I'm sure you've thought of that. I'll be very interested in hearing out your details...
Yeah, I won’t get into any of the details yet, but obviously that will be one of the main factors to consider.
In my opinion downvoting wars will be self limiting. In any solution with increased downvoting there would probably be some wars initially as people get comfortable and seek to establishe the new social rules and find the limits of revised expectations.
But ultimately downvoting is costly and they will probably find a better way to work out their differences.
Over time the threat of downvoting may become more important than the actual downvoting, with actual downvotes rarely occuring, but also less abusive upvoting of low-value content (i.e. people self-police more, because they know if they don't the downvotes are more likely to come).
But we can discuss further once @timcliff lets us know more about what he has in mind.
Fair enough, thanks for even looking into it!