RE: A(nother) discussion on voting and reward pool rape
i agree with you. i get worried myself.
what if a group of whales form an alliance to upvote something to suit their needs?
on the other hand, if the system is truly decentralized as it should be, no whale should have enough power to do something a million other minnows disagree with.
then there's also the cases where a group of minnows get together with foul intensions to deliberately downvote something and they have power over average folks who don't have the exposure. yes racist/sexist/etc minnows often get together and i've seen it in other communities.
so i still have a lot of questions regarding decentralization. but my take is no central system should ever restrict ANYBODY, whales or minnows. except the restrictions they would have in a free market.
i don't think any one person will have a creative idea to stop a billion dollar whale if the whale decides to simply overpower everybody or abuse the system. in that case there should be enough minnows to stop the process. if not, it's what we deserve.
my hopes is that there will be enough people to stop anything like that.
I agree but, in the 'real world' bad actors are know and have physical skin in the free market. Here, (currently) they can remain anonymous and act with very little cost other than their investment.
yes we have the abusers. i think it's part of the freedom. don't get me wrong i do agree with you.
it's just that living in a very centralized nation i've experienced how one restriction can lead to another. eventually you end up with a bunch of rules that only help the few that has power. and the ones who pay them and work with them.
but minnows.. if there's enough of them, they should have the power to bring down a whale and that whale can no longer dictate anything. right now i don't think we have a system that allows us to do that? as in if you're a whale you're staying a whale?