RE:POB proposals
Leave me the possibility to cut off overrated, overvalued rewards (the place where circle-jerking appears), and I will vote "YES" for everything else. I hate BLURT, and don't want to see myself in another blurt-like place
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
After a bit of back and forth with Marky, I have to write that I don't disagree with you. The stigma of the DV is incredible, however.
Initially, I think the approach was to remove the DV altogether or require consensus for all DV's. The problem there was that I would have had my legs cut out from under me when searching for plagiarism or other types of fraud.
I see now one flaw in the proposal. If YOU are also protecting the system via DV'ing over-rewards, then you and others must also have some sort of standard that should be defined in the proposal. For example:
Questions we'd then need to ask is: how much is too much? What's an acceptable reward? We'd have to bring some objectivity to the subject, if that's even possible. Well, I think we can at least all see that if a post is barely a paragraph, the rewards shouldn't be that much.
Now, the proposal gives room for changes, but because DV for your area isn't defined that means you'd have to wait for a change. Any amount of time with your hands tied behind your back is too long.
I feel I'll also have to address the elephant in the room too before I can get some traction. I'll need to define both malicious upvoting AND downvoting - Christ, with verifiable examples too I guess. It's almost like I can't get to the next phase without addressing that topic.