Interesting to see where this goes. Traditionally, downvotes have proven to be a useful tool. I can think of a few (maybe still around, but in my vybrain) failed projects that harnessed the mechanic of no downvotes. Whaleshares and Blurt come to mind. I see you haven't gotten rid of them entirely, but have no monetary effect. Funny, because that's silently inclusive in the argument I put forth - i.e. @thealliance - which you quoted in this post from @dreemsteem's recent one. This is a new approach, I hope it works out well and I'll be watching!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yes, removing DVs from Layer 1 without having robust alternative means to combat abuse does not seem viable (e.g. Whaleshares and Blurt). That's why we favor a Layer 2 solution. We can rely on Layer 1 for account-level censorship-resistance while managing abuse at the tribe level. We will use the blunt instrument of the tribe-wide mute for egregious offenses, but we eventually hope to develop community-driven standards and metrics so that every upvote can be a far-more-informed upvote, thus curbing certain forms of abuse, such as circle-voting, at the individual upvote level. For example, the front-end displays each accountholders circle-voting metric at the top of each post, so that before I cast an upvote I can consciously choose to not vote or to lower my upvote if that # is high.