You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The cost of negligence

in #curationlast month

However I doubt that the dv are the solution, these dv in repeated "post" of the same author, without any explanation could cause a negative influence to the authors, since it could lower the morale thinking that they are doing something wrong, when in reality it is not their fault for what is happening, which could generate the demotivation of this to continue publishing giving a bad experience and not wanting to return to the hive platform anymore, I do not agree that the random negative vote is the solution because the biggest disadvantaged is the author because for many obtaining a significant reward and seeing a negative vote lowers our morale thinking that we are doing things wrong and that they do not even tell us what we are doing wrong, it's just my point of view.

Sort:  

There is no solution, we have a whale delegating blindly to an abuser with no one willing to do a damn thing about it. It's gone on for far too long and this isn't even the only issue with it. No one posts explanation on why they upvote and upvotes are far more of a problem here than downvotes, by a factor of 1000:1.

I understand, however, what I am looking for is for the authors to be the least harmed, so a suggestion is that if you are going to continue giving negative votes (the ideal would be that you do not give negative votes if there is no direct reason for the post, it is just a suggestion) is that the votes be more random so that the authors will be the least harmed, since I have read in the discord the discontent of these and the lack of motivation for receiving these, and it would be sad if some of these left the platform for being the cause of collateral damage.

Loading...