So the guy with "overvalued content" (IMO) wants to downvote content based on the subjective "overvalue" standard?
How surprising. Now that wouldn't increase the reward pool for his content, would it? Some folk's motives are clear indeed.
Well written, again. Thank you for breaking down the DPOS situation for us. From SEEM to HIVE to POB, people don't change. Change the rules, and they'll find a way to game the changes.
It's a shame that the bullywhales never understand how driving people off the chain reduces the use of the chain, and from there, the lowered value of rewards they get in the long run.
Isn't this literally what his point is? People should downvote his overvalued content and he in turn should be able to downvote overvalued content he believes is. It's baffling to me how people instead of working on some methods to be alerted when malicious downvotes occur and how to combat it they're just ready to give up and call an experiment as failed when the tools and the masses are there. It's pretty clear we can't remove downvotes, just look at what Steem and Blurt looks like without them, all short term crying over downvotes on posts many deem overrewarded is void but it's something most people like to focus on. If many band together to combat malicious downvotes or zero'ing of posts they can share the amount needed to counter it and everyone only loses a little ROI doing that, the rest is up to the malicious downvoter. If he decides to go out of his way to start attacking people countering his downvotes then you counter them too, eventually he will need to start dipping into his upvote mana which will cost him meaning the masses countering his downvotes take a small ROI loss while the malicious downvoter starts sacrificing all his curation rewards if he wants to continue doing so. Eventually they give up or leave/power down completely, this has also been proven.
It's the countering and being able to ask people for help that's the difficult part, but it's something that should be figured out eventually even if the issues of malicious downvotes are only 0.001% of all votes. Removing downvotes completely or trying to jump over hurdles to make this a safe space for people through centralization is not a solution.
For Layer 1, yes. However, Layer 2 should be a place where a plethora of experiments are encouraged and implemented.
Yeah, I'm interested to see what people come up with on L2. I have an idea for a token myself that's focused on curation I'd like to experiment with when I find the time, funding and devs.
there are a couple of services that do this on HIVE, freezepeach, iirc
I dont think that it's a matter of unwillingness to confront malicious DVs as much as it is a lack of an easy venue to do it through. setting up a community is hard (I know). getting a community publicized is harder.
that is something an individual will have to organize the effort with no recompense. otoh, I would certainly argue that the person that did set this up for POB should fix a beneficiary as part of the process.
Totally Agree and tied to have followed ya.
@geneeverett read this! It’s what is happening to you. Every post getting zeroed out.
https://www.proofofbrain.io/hive-150329/@lucylin/and-on-the-eight-day-god-created-the-can-opener-
here's a thought..
definitely interesting idea
...anything that promotes free market dynamics and not socialist ones (the current hive set up) is the way to go for any chance of growth.
Socialism (and it's mindset ) , is the cancer of innovation and the killer of anything positive.
I think it's the crony capitalism/syndicated socialism quandry...essentially there's no difference when power gets that centralized, over time, then power is used to control, not to create. Corruption and decadence take priority...real life? not so much.
The self-proclaimed "elite" abandon accepted means of politics to maintain their power.
Interesting post from today looking at this issue (I've been getting a lot of synchronicity lately, probably karma saying sorry for fucking me out of DEFCON, LOL):
Delta vs. the Delta Response
my comment here at #237
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?blog=86&post=394888#c35186378