You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Simple Redesign on Downvote for More Positivity
Yeah I mean this is an interesting perspective but I really don't think it is needed. You make good points about the issues with the downvote only period. I really don't think these downvotes are as troublesome as you might think.
There is definitely a problem with some users abusing their stake to downvote against users. A better solution lies around forming a better resolution system where stake can be pooled for the purpose of manually restoring payouts to posts that have been abused. This is basically a charitable service for the network so it would need people to stand behind the idea for the sake of the steem blockchain as a whole.
If the platform gets popular I think we can expect an increase in the amount of abuse. If it devalues someones post just because some hypothetical dark whale and following cronies start flag a persons account to the ground, then I dont see people hanging around to get their hard made posts and oncome devalued. Not where money is involved.
I do like this and while the community is small it could be feasible, but I dont know how well even that would work. I dont see a case by case basis working if steemit blows up. How many people are even on steemit? Im not sure how large this platform has gotten.
This is all hypothetical ofc, steemit might remain a smallish community relative to the youtubes and reddits out there. I just think if reddit earned money by upvotes on posts, we woulndt even have a reddit in its current form.
When the platform gets more popular there is going to need to be more stakeholder involvement in maintaining an appropriate content payout profile. Period. This is what will make or break steem.
When steem gets bigger the manual adjustment is really going to be supplemented by many more bots voting. Curation bots will become smarter and stakeholders can use them to address problems like flag abuse directly. Manual review is going to be a part for a long time IMO.
Curation bots? I never considered that. How would they function? Search out patterns of abuse and allow decisions to be made without human intervention?
I have faith in the community but I worry what will happen when organizations get involved. I guess you are correct that right now its not a worry.
Curation bots are around now doing just that. They will only improve in scope and efficiency.
I disagree with you. I can only see a "resolution system" as unnecessary bureaucracy, and wonder how do you imagine this would really work? It sounds complexifying, not to mention that it would require more new user onboarding.
Like I said, this will probably have to be 'charitable' until its effect on steem price as a whole is tangible. Bots and users that ensure proper payouts are going to be a cornerstone for steem progress.
We can already do that. I was disagreeing with your "a better resolution system" idea in so far as you described it.
Well the resolution system would be something community directed, or at least stake directed. This would be a system where users who are being wrongly flagged or abused can get a human appeal with the prospects of a group with lots of steem power to help the user out - a user who had previously been essentially removed from the view and conversation.
An appeals process is really antithetical to the current philosophy, which is that of incentives only. I'm in favour of retaining this.
Appeals are centralized by nature, as they have to be to some authority. I've debated ideas around that in the past, even proposed some, but ultimately concluded that they are too complex and require a layer which I do not which to see - management.
Users can still act towards a common in the system as it is stands (they do, the whale experiment is one for example), there is just no formal mechanism for this. I think we should not introduce one.
You don't want formality, that is fine. An appeals process would be entirely a layer above steem. It is entirely based on incentives - incentives stakeholders have to keep the network free from abuse. Absolutely aligned with the current philosophy.
There shal be a formalization of 'the whale experiment' and things of the like. There must be if the platform grows.
If you really mean a layer above steem, i.e. an app on steem, I'm all for that, and in fact have suggested it.
If you're going to define "incentives" so broadly, it's true what you say. Obviously I meant direct reward based incentives, not more general health-of-the-system ideas, which I agree are relevant. Not to be baked in though on a systems level.
The formalization of the whale experiment are really direct changes. We have the current proposal (which is looking like it will become a reality) of the linear rewards curve as a response to this.
Well said.
I really was hoping the HF19 linear rewards was pretty unanimous.