I really would like to see that experimented.
I find that an appealing suggestion. Leaving it up to the user actually seems to me to be a kind of inbuilt code of honour, where people are perhaps more likely to behave in a way that motivates them to give an accurate self-assessment of their published content. Rather than engaging in wishful thinking that mediocre/low effort content should be rewarded in a wonderful way. Although I would still say that, for example, visual material that is generally considered "valuable" because it is a contemporary testimony or other "low effort" products at first glance are not at second or third glance. The same applies the other way round: postings that appear elaborate at first glance can be quick and superficial products.
Thinking of widening/varying the functions here, I often thought about experiments with the "buttons", like for example to switch my user habit from the voting scale (preference method) into something different, the method of "least resistance".
On a scale of 0-10, one decides what resistance they experience towards a posting. Where one decides upon the least resistance, one gives a 0. Where one decides upon the most resistance (pain), one gives a 10. All values in between are given by feeling.
I think that would lead to significantly different results in the overall outcome of a posting and change as well the payout results (in the background, a 10 would correspond to a one to zero percent vote and a 0 resistance would correspond to a 100 % upvote).
Are you in the position to be able to code something like that and run it as an experiment?
I'm sure I could do it, but I've no idea what kind of effort it will take me to get familiar with Condenser and make such a change.
Do you mean something like finding the code for this element...
... and altering it to be something like this?
And then inverting the linear 100-10000 scale into a logarithmic 10000 - 100 in the background (technically a 100% upvote is 10000 weight and 1% is 100 weight).
To get any meaningful information out of it though you'd then need to test it on a bunch of people either by A/B testing it on Hive.blog or with a focus group.
Even then, in truth the big voters are auto-voting anyway, or delegating to curators who understand the underlying mechanics well enough.
Edit: After getting responses to this post, I no longer think we can fix the issue just with front end changes, as the cap would create problematic disincentives for curators. IMO, an upvote should have always had a recommended reward level attached, and the final reward should be based on the stake-weighted-median of recommended rewards. Curation rewards would also have to work differently in this case. However at this stage of the project I'm not sure if there's much value left in trying to continually readjust the tokenomics with hard forks either 😕
Thank you for your effort, appreciated.
Providing space for such playful experiments would be an innovation plus in my eyes. But you're right that you would need a very large number of participants who are keen to experiment. Or a completely new front end (high risk). What it would bring in the long term is uncertain.
With my idea, I wouldn't use emojis, but would actually work with numbers from 1-10. It would be exciting to compare the results, for example, if you set up a ranking and have results at the end of a quarter, for example, for a self-analysis, such as "which of my posts achieved the least resistance from the voters?" and also in comparison with other bloggers.
True. Still, it's fun to think of other than the usual functions and solutions. For whatever it might be useful.
Greetings :)
The use of emotes seems like a great idea.