1 - Got it! Are there any other rep systems aside from Steem-UA that you'd recommend we investigate?
2 - Agreed on Sybil attacks; we're trying to strike a balance. If we don't give enough weight to up-votes in the ReviewScore
, then an honest minnow's up-vote would have 0 impact. So we figured we would give a 2x factor on VotePoints
and see how it behaves in production. If we notice it's not working, we can always adjust the algo later and re-calculate because it's all run and computed off-chain.
Check out the examples on page 17 and 18. In traditional review systems, an entity that gets a 5-star review and a 1-star review would have a net overall rating of 3 stars because there is no differentiation between each review, they are treated equal. (1 + 5)/2 = 3
. We attempt to differentiate between high and low-quality reviews via the ReviewScore
, so a crypto project that gets a 1-star review and a 5-star review is likely to not have an overall score of 3, as one review may carry more weight and therefore skew the overall rating in its favor.
3 - Got it. I'll do more research on the author / curator split. Are there any other steem-based dapps that you know of that are struggling with the 75/25 ratio?
4 - Our view on the ICO is mixed. We'd like to inject capital into the project ASAP to accelerate development, but we also fear selling 55% of the token supply to a small pool of investors who's primary motivation is to dump. We're considering an airdrop to STEEM hodlers, but we also don't want to airdrop tokens to a bunch of people who are fundamentally not that interested in crypto / will never use the platform. Lastly, we're also considering starting the supply at literally 0, like Steem, and "pre-mining" some for the founders to establish initial influence in the network, and then opening it up to the public and letting the supply grow entirely through rewards.
Thank you again for all of your feedback. We're big fans of DTube, so it's an honor talking to you about this!