There's no ideal solution, I just remember Steem when there were no DVs
It was shit.
I think @themarkymark put it most succinctly in a comment somewhere - for every malicious DV there are 100 irresponsible upvotes.
On a complete tangent i think it's a moot point - I'm not about to invest that heavily in a side chain where I don't know who the token issuer is, or worse, where i don't know but i've got an idea and I think he might be a bit of a loose cannon.
Maybe for that reason we shouldn't have DVs - from an investor's perspective POB can only ever be a bit of fun anyway! Dvs can ruin that for sure.
100? More like 1000-10000 :)
Yes, I overuse my 0 key so I have to be conservative with it.
Some of the extremes that you pointed out were pretty clear to see like with your article on Lassecash.
Is there a word count/rewards ratio where you deem something is over-rewarded? Could it be that objective? Is there some consensus behind the scenes before a DV on over-rewarding gets issued?
For instance, self-voting is tolerated, but if I gave this comment a full upvote on my POB account, I "feel" that would be malicious. Would I be correct in writing that observation?
Are there types of malicious upvoting? Just looking for guidance here.
It is very subjective.
In my opinion? Yes. I am personally not a fan of self voting comments. In some rare cases I may do so with a small vote to bring it to the top of the comments if it is something critical. But in almost all cases self voting comments is just farming.
All the conspiracy posts that take half of trending that get massive votes for pseudo science. All the whales that voted 5-20 vote posts that had no rewards to maximize their curation with little effort (pre-hardfork 25). There are a few whales dropping $15-40 votes without regard to quality or even content and they stack on top of each other to take posts near $100 when they normally only take a few cents. Just look at trending, you will see the same 5-6 whales controlling it with no regard to quality.
I could go on, but I will struggle to find many cases of this elusive "malicious downvoting" that we are trying to stop by making laws on how to vote with their stake.
Christ almighty. I keep going back to what you said in discord some time ago about the number of fraud attempts that occur on Hive. This type of upvoting is just as bad.
I appreciate your response, though. Have you written any posts related to this type of upvoting? Or, do you know anyone who has?
I think I have an idea about what people talk about regarding "malicious downvoting", but I don't have a full picture yet so I can't speak to it at this time.
I’ve written many posts about specific cases but not in the idea in general.
It’s unavoidable, people will vote friends, many will vote using as little effort as possible, many will vote things that are ridiculous but it is something they believe in, very few will organically curate to the best of the ability.
But if you think of it, what crypto requires you to spend 2-8 hours a day really mostly shit content to receive 10% at best reward for it? It’s expect that people in general will avoid doing that.
Great points as usual, but what is high quality? How can I adjust my curation to meet that requirement? I vote on posts that meet some requirements. How can I gauge what I grade against what the rest of the community sees as adequate?
I think OCD has a good platform. I remember a post that one of their curators made. I'll check them for specifics unless other options are available.
Quality is subjective but I think we can all agree we don’t need any more pictures of flowers from someone’s backyard for $100+.
That’s probably more than 50-80% of the voters.
Anytime manual curation is used it usually will be better. This isn’t always the case as most of the delegation projects in the past have been abused.
After hard fork 25, there is no need to delegate anymore as you can just follow without penalties now.
There is no perfect solution, my point is simply these “malicious downvotes” are extremely rare and poor upvotes are exponentially more common, yet the focus is to create laws to force users to vote in a centralized fashion or have their rewards stolen. I hope after they do this they put one in telling people how to upvote that is acceptable as well.
Yeah… I see way too much collateral damage when whales start downvoting whales.. and minnows get wiped out. Lots of people quitting over losing a few pennies on the 7th day. 1 or 2 hive is nothing to a whale but it’s a meal for some people in the world.
Agreed 💯
But Nobody cares.
Sadly...
It’s just like real Life ... the Rich get richer and the poor have what little they have stolen from them by the Rich. It’s just how it goes ... absolutely nothing can be done about it. It sucks to be poor.
Yes, it's sucks.