For real? Can you explain further...most of the posts on Hive are under 20 Hive, at 20 cent Hive that would be $4 and not many get near that
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
For real? Can you explain further...most of the posts on Hive are under 20 Hive, at 20 cent Hive that would be $4 and not many get near that
Look back at the last hardfork, I forget when exactly, but it was the talk of the town.
@acidyo is a good one to ask.
Yeah was during the 50/50 change and the downvote pool.
You ready to do away with it?
It served its stated purpose.
Abuse is getting harder to find.
I'd be for it, wasn't much a fan of it to begin with since it lowered the vote strength of smaller legit accounts and has made many who focus on maximizing never vote on comments or posts they know may not hit the threshold naturally.
It definitely killed comment voting.
Glad to know you aren't a fan, either.
@thelogicaldude brought this up on @hivecoffee when he was on, he mentioned how people aren't even reading posts it seems so much as curating rewards as the voter. We all put in effort to our quality of content to an extent, but then as soon as we as a community are voting it seems to trend towards those higher payout to maximize curation rewards.
I will be the first to admit, I upvote 100% the top post on Hive daily. Alot of the time these posts are a circle of about 20 authors who consistently get those payouts, I noticed that by participating in this trend.
It was meant to punish low vote reward farming that may be hard to find, think thousands of 10-100 hp accounts farming posts/comments on top of spamming the chain with these actions. I agree the curve was set a bit too high and there's been talks about lowering it or removing it altogether so looking forward to how this evolves in future hardforks.
Perhaps scaling it down exponentially and then making a simply system for the community to vote to stop scaling down the threshold would get peoples attention and potentially reach a larger consensus on this threshold.
We need folks to step up and follow downvote trails, then they can't use this excuse, which is what it was, a false front, to keep us down.
It is no issue to monitor the chain for small votes, they do it all the time, but with this solution they get paid, too.
Don't let them fool you, rich people need their munies much more than poor people, for the most part.
I already have 8 followers on my trail.
I am giving my downvote to @darkflame who is admin of @hivecoffee.
Also @broncnutz because he is downvoting a left wing shill both of us despise who has a unhealthy obsession with anti Trump tabloid grade shit posts. Its rare I will go after Trump Derangement Syndrome but this media outlet is just trash in general imo even when he is focused on his left wing elitism that is causing cancel culture to take root everywhere online.
Does this mean anyone I downvote, you also will downvote? I find the discussion very interesting but am still understanding the mechanics of the downvote. There are certain types of content that should be downvoted, but I have actually been enjoying some quality content lately. I could start downvoting if I find content that is problematic, but I don't really want to start downvoting content that I just don't like, as some do. I think could be useful with correcting abusive actions, if users are exploiting the reward pool or not delivering any Proof-of-Brain value.
The proof of brain value would come from lowering the inflation of the rewards pool.
This concept would be going towards 100% Community consensus or the post would be censored from the front end, I'm sure there's a way to scale some sort of interoperability into a downvote trail that would enable small users to effectively flag spam without requiring a service like @hivewatchers
I'm not really down with content moderation through flagging.
Being pro free speech means changing the channel.
I have been following your trail with one of my alts.
I knew you were downvoting that guy, but didn't care enough to speak up for him.
They tell me that is wrong, I shouldn't be like that, but there it is.
My buddy watches that guy regularly, one day we were watching it and that dude said he would allow a lie to stand if that lie served his cause.
My buddy couldn't see why that was wrong.
He's a yankee, so what do you do?
'It is the duty of the intellectual to tell the truth, and expose lies.' Bill Hicks
But that guy uses the Alinsky method, and I'm not down with 'by any means necessary'.
People should take Leofinance as an example. They have much more user growth, I mean real active users, not ghost accounts.