You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Would Greater Comment Voting Help The Community?
Great discussion. I think that upvoting comments more would be a significant improvement to the community. @abit has been doing a beyond amazing job on this!
One thing though - they technically removed this logic in an earlier hardfork. Comments no longer distribute any of the rewards back to parent comments or the parent post.
"Good discussion requires back and forth posting. When you reply to someone else, they get 50% of any payout you receive in that thread. This rule applies up to 6 levels deep. Starting a big discussion greatly rewards the parent poster."
OK thanks that was what I was wondering:)
What do think about the 50:50 idea (or 75:25) - give 50% of your vote to the post and 50% to the best comment(s)?
That may still be an improvement on the current situation.
When I like a comment but not the post, why should I be forced to give some % to the post? If it's designed that way, I'd rather not upvote that comment directly, but ask the author of the comment to copy that comment to one of her own post, then I'll upvote the new one without hesitation.
The original thinking was that since it was the post that spurred the conversation then it was in part responsible and hence should be rewarded.
According to @timcliff it doesn't work that way any more. It goes entirely to the commenters now so you don't have to worry about it.
I was worried because I thought you were proposing to enable it again. :)
For example, when @cheetah left a reply on a plagiarized post, I may want to reward @cheetah by upvoting the reply but won't want to reward the post.
What about posts that are in essence not good at all, but still take the opportunity to respond with good comments; Maybe to help the writer of the post to become better; Maybe to help the writer to see things with more open minded view? I would comment on posts where for instance the writer has a BIG tunnel view, or did not think of the topic he/she is addressing at all, I may take the opportunity to try and help such person to think about that topic from different angles, to open the mind of that person more. Kind of being a teacher trying to make the world a little bit better. In such situation I may want to upvote the post to support, but someone else may like my comments, my effort to try to 'better' the world a little bit, but does not like the original post at all. In my short time here on Steemit, I actually did upvote comments to posts already since I liked the comment, for which I did not wanted to reward the original post.
Yes abuse would be an exception to the premise of the original system (about the only one I can think of though). Perhaps there would be some other way to address the exception without throwing away the whole rule though.
No I was just wondering if it still worked. Right - I hadn't thought of those issues.
It's a cool idea. I think anything that gets people voting on comments more is a good thing.
My vote doesn't count for a whole lot, but I still upvote quite a few comments (and posts) at 100% voting weight.
Yes same here my vote is normally only one cent because I vote a lot. I think it will still help though because it might encourage others to do the same and so the cumulative effect will be greater.
Also after HF 17 with the separate comment reward pool those votes may be worth significantly more.
Although my vote doesn't count for a lot, actually almost nothing since I'm new to the platform and have very low SP, I do upvote posts AND comments with 100%. Comments I upvote to show appreciation and also to encourage others to vote for the comments as well. I do everything manually, no bot has my voting power. I also vote for posts that may be in the system for a minute.
In generally, I vote for things I read only, and that I liked and/or want to support for various reasons.
Lol you are not the only one. I don't really pay attention to the timing unless I am using a bot. For my manual voting I just vote whenever I see a post.