You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: 2 Problems Plaguing Steemit That Synereo Could Potentially Solve

in #synereo8 years ago (edited)

As I already said I think posts need to be broadcasted anonymously to the world with absolutely zero details about them, number of votes, dollar amount and author should be hidden from the public and only visible to the author. Only then people will actually upvote the content. Curators don't need any other info but content, everything else is a distraction and have a negative influence.
Once the voting system is unbiased it allows for a fair distribution which means more diversified. Currently what is happening is basically whales creating a second generation of whales. It's like you have the 300 biggest whales giving all their vote to the other 300 whales that will soon be bigger than themselves, whales needs to stop voting for the same stuff everyday. The solution is encrypt author and post details . ( they can be available a few hours before payout for example but should not influence during voting process)

Sort:  

As soon as reputation went in the votes to low reps disappeared.

As I already said I think posts need to be broadcasted anonymously to the world with absolutely zero details about them, number of votes, dollar amount and author should be hidden from the public and only visible to the author.

How do you do that on a blockchain? What about transparency?

Curators don't need any other info but content, everything else is a distraction and have a negative influence.

That's false. From an economic perspective, curators should upvote if they value the post more than its predicted payout (and should downvote otherwise, assuming we didn't have downvotes/flagging tied together). Everything else is just irrational behavior and human bias noise.

Edit: Just for clarity, I'll add that these would be equivalent if content visibility were the same for all blogs, but it just can't be if its ranked in any way. And it needs to be ranked.

It's like you have the 300 biggest whales giving all their vote to the other 300 whales that will soon be bigger than themselves

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing... inactive whales get a lower share, wealth gets redistributed.

whales needs to stop voting for the same stuff everyday

It's really just a visibility problem combined with low bot competition. As competition grows, bots will become smarter and there will be more author diversity.

Wealth distribution, visibility and content quality are all major problems that will most likely all get sorted out over time. I think the only issue is that it might be too slow of a process for us to scale effectively and make this less of a gambling site and more content quality based. There are some ways we can make this faster, I don't see "encrypting" information as being helpful (quite the contrary actually) or even implementable.

I hope my answers/comments were clear enough, if not I invite you to come discuss those on rocket.chat. I'm quite surprised by the amount of support your comment received so I hope I didn't misinterpret your views.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.19
TRX 0.15
JST 0.029
BTC 63931.73
ETH 2663.43
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.84