Make Downvotes Great Again?
Your downvote is invited!
On downvoting and curation
Downvoting is a tricky thing. My opinion is that a downvote-free system should be possible and would be preferable (for example). However, my opinion is also that we don't currently have such a system.
The problem of curation is the problem of accurately ranking/appraising a post's value. When we get it wrong, that damages the blockchain's credibility and (presumably) the value of STEEM. (IMO) This means that overvalued posts are as much of a problem to the ecosystem and the value of STEEM as undervalued posts. It's two sides of the same coin.
But, we have seen in the past that heavy downvoting in order to regulate overvaluations leads to retaliation, disappointment, and a lot of fear among blockchain participants. In recent years, this problem is complicated by a number of high-value investors who specifically depend on the existence of overvalued posts for their ROI.
As a result of these negative aspects and investment use cases, I think that most of us are not using any/all of our downvote resources in our curation activities.
So, the question is, how do we make use of the regulatory power of the downvote without harming investors and without instilling fear among blockchain participants?
Pixabay license from geralt
The concept
Some years ago, when the account was still active, I remember that @personz had posted something about a telegram/discord chat group where he was a member.
In this chat group, participants were invited to post links to their articles for the attention of curators. There was a catch, however. Posting your link in this chat came with conditions.
Specifically, group members understood that when a link was posted there, all group members were going to respond in one of two ways: upvote or downvote.
The idea, as I understood and remember it, was that under those conditions someone is only going to submit their link if they're fairly sure that the post is something that people are going to like.
I have no idea where this chat group was, but I assume that it's no longer active. Also, I personally don't use discord or telegram applications because I think the applications are bloated and I don't like the way that they intrude into all aspects of my device. Finally, I am not a fan of "out of band" solutions to Steem problems. I think, whenever possible, Steem problems should be solved inside the Steem ecosystem.
However, I thought at the time and still think now that the idea of seeking guaranteed votes (up or down) was a really good one from the perspective of incubating content that will attract eyeballs to the ecosystem.
The possibilities
Some time ago, it occurred to me that a Steem community could be created for the same purpose. I didn't write about it at the time, though, because proposing a community implies the need for admins, moderators, and membership-related activities, and I don't have time to get into those activities.
Recently, though @the-gorilla reminded me that communities are less effective than tags for SEO. After that, it occurred to me that maybe we could implement the upvote/downvote game at a specific tag. For example, maybe we could call it "Running #thegauntlet"?
All we would need is an understanding that anyone posting using the agreed tag (in tag#2-5) is signaling their belief to curators that this post is of sufficient to quality to upvote, and at the same time requesting a downvote if the curator disagrees - or if the curator thinks that the current valuation is too high. In other words, the author is specifically requesting an accurate appraisal, not just an upvote.
Then, people could use the tag with a post on their own blog or in any community. If it works as theorized, to promote attractive content, this could be used in conjunction with relevant first-tags in order to enhance Steemit's SEO, and it could be used in communities to attract subscribers and participation.
Objections
This suggestion dodges most of the past problems with downvoting because it's easy for an author to avoid the downvotes. Just don't use the tag. The people who are using the tag are precisely the ones who believe that their content can withstand some extra scrutiny.
The main challenge I see is that we would need enough curators to monitor the tag and to vote one way or the other on every post they see. Once again, we start out with a "herding cats" problem. If enough curators don't participate, there will be no incentive for authors to participate. Extending on that, Steemit might also need to adjust their downvoting rules to enable participation by their community curation teams.
Another objection might be that the overvalued content will still be out there. This is true, but at least we can hope to cultivate more attractive content that would offset it in our search rankings. Further, as attractive content expands, that should reduce the ability to profiteer from overvalued content. I've said this many times, but it's still true: audience + rewards is more valuable than rewards alone. If we succeed at delivering an audience for content creators, the audience-driven creators should be able to outcompete the creators who are seeking rewards alone.
Conclusion
So, we don't have a tag yet, but I'll go first. If you read this post, please vote for it with an upvote or with a downvote!
Also, please comment with your thoughts on the suggestion.
Thank you for your time and attention.
As a general rule, I up-vote comments that demonstrate "proof of reading".
Steve Palmer is an IT professional with three decades of professional experience in data communications and information systems. He holds a bachelor's degree in mathematics, a master's degree in computer science, and a master's degree in information systems and technology management. He has been awarded 3 US patents.
Pixabay license, source
Reminder
Visit the /promoted page and #burnsteem25 to support the inflation-fighters who are helping to enable decentralized regulation of Steem token supply growth.
Downvoting is an age old issue on Steem that has played a fundamental part at key moments in the chain's history - particularly during the Big Split.
While Steem is now largely a 'Downvote Free Zone' it is interesting to make comparisons with our estranged non-identical twin Hive.
I believe Downvoting is still an everyday carry there.
My observations from afar are two-fold...
Downvoting on Hive seems to be quite vindictive and overly punishing to the point that it regularly drives people away (and often back to Steem)
While there are obviously many other factors (DAO?) their downvoting activity doesn't seem to have helped the HIVE price as it has continued to sink down to near parity with STEEM over the last couple of years.
With the current state of the investor ecosystem on Steem I am not sure there is a fair way to utilise downvoting here at the moment...
Well, I think this suggestion would actually be fair, because any author can avoid the downvotes by simply not using the tag.
I'm definitely not a fan of downvoting in the way that it used to be used here and - I suspect - is still used on Hive. But, there's a big spectrum to experiment with in between all and nothing.
I'd be curious if the curators in the chat that @personz had posted about ever actually used many downvotes. It may be that the mere threat of downvotes guaranteed that they wouldn't be needed very often. It's a shame that we don't have anyone to ask about that.
(BTW, my American spell-checker thinks that "utilise" is misspelled. 😉)
I use downvotes - always when I clearly recognise a scammer (clear plagiarism, preferably from someone else's Steemit articles). Or clear farming spammers. Now this is not my hobby and I'm not hunting. But if I see somebody ... ;-)
I don't think we need a game or a specific hashtag. We just need to realise that downvotes are as much a part of the ecosystem as upvotes. And the Steemit team and its loyal followers should also realise this. After all, they have an impressive stake and don't need to be afraid of "revenge".
Okay, not my stake. I use my stake for both. That's good. Do it too, dear community!
Even if Steemit decided to unleash their downvoting resources, I think it might still be more effective to start by fencing off a small area of the blockchain and expanding from there. But yeah, if more stakeholders started using their downvote capability more regularly things might be different, and something like this might not be useful. Something would need to spur the change in behavior, though.
Retaliation can take different forms. They don't have to worry about being the victims of downvote wars, but an aggrieved party can still cause a lot of chaos that might harm the value of their holdings.
And of course, I'm not suggesting that this would be the only place for downvoting. Plagiarism, spam, etc, would still be downvoted anywhere. This would just be a place where authors would be highly motivated because they know that subpar content would be curated more aggressively - and it would only work if the flip is also true that highly appealing content is more likely to be valued correctly.
I think the idea of wanting to improve the "content sorting" aspect of the chain is good, but downvoting content feels more aggressive then I like. (And I downvoted the post to get in the spirit of the topic, when you can only express an opinion in a binary way how do you say "good presentation of an idea I disagree with"?). Plus it's really hard to shake the instinct that downvoting someone is risky, if someone with a big stake chooses to hold a grudge they can make a small account's life miserable.
Part of the problem with the idea of the "wisdom of crowds" is that the assessments need to be independent. The mechanism of the chain, where your vote is a mix of both your own judgment of the post and also whether others have overvalued/undervalued it muddies the waters.
Rather than downvoting, I think it could potentially be more useful to somehow gamify ranking between posts. So you read N posts and put them in quality order without seeing anyone else's judgement, and then we can compare those virtual comparisons to the rewards to see how aligned they are.
I hope it's clear from the opening paragraph that I would also prefer a downvote-free solution. I agree that I'm not really a fan of downvoting, but in our current system I think that it's a necessary evil or a lesser of evils, however you want to phrase it. This suggestion is seeking something that's possible with the tools that are presently available.
I would probably prefer something like that, too, but the question is implementation. I don't know who would implement this, or how. Coincidentally, I recently watched a somewhat related video that talked about different forms of voting, including preferential ranking:
Thank you. Strangely, I was hoping that someone would. (and also that it wouldn't be too painful😉)
The biggest problem with social media is the same every artist or express-or that believes their expression is worthwhile may be killed, maimed, or destroyed because it doesn't matter what is posted there are those will hate it - jokes are a bigger Baghdad Bob for example. Wildly Popular in some parts of the world but bombed in others.
The real problem is: what if does a how to make bioweapons etc, at home.
Have you heard of the Anarchists Cookbook, I thought of writing a Conservatives Cookbook but the anarchists would steal and be more likely to use the "recipes"
Is a downvote enough?
Some people didn't like that doctor in Wuhan reporting on Steemit live, and they hate crypto - the people that didn't like the reports. Still truth is better than fiction
True, but the blockchain is supposed to produce some sort of consensus opinion. Nothing is ever going to be perfect, but I think we should always be searching for ways to make this consensus into a ranking that provides more value and bigger audiences to more people.
I've heard of it, but I don't know much about it. Just that it exists.
I don't remember this. Not sure if I missed it or if it just slipped my mind. I agree that truth is better than fiction (except for entertainment purposes). I do remember reading a doctor who was reporting from Wuhan during the pandemic, but I am not certain if it was here, and I don't remember it being controversial, so I may not be thinking of the same person.
Yes the Wuhan doctor happened here. He was a man. After that is when Steemit changed hands and began to fall.
I was merely talking about the facts about creators, for example J.K. Rowling and her Harry Potter series.
When it first came out there was a Hugh and Crystal of outrage against the whole kit and kaboodle of the wizards school and magic.
Then she went against the transgenders, writing there were only men and women. Now there was some hate in response!
Have a good one my friend
Agreed!
Downvoting... it’s tricky and will likely be abused. While, if used correctly (with the parameters you mentioned), it could be healthy for the ecosystem, the harm caused by undeserved upvotes will be insignificant compared to the damage caused by abusive downvotes.
Some people express their opinions in a toxic manner. Even if we exclude the major stakeholders or 'big whales' and the manipulation they may engage in with their downvotes, the level of toxicity some individuals can exert through their downvotes can still be overwhelming. I'm talking about emotional damage here.
I agree with this. I'm pretty sure that many people were driven away from the ecosystem by the overly aggressive "downvote wars" of the past. I definitely don't want to see the capability used that way again.
I also noticed recently that there are apparently now services providing "downvote insurance", which complicates the problem even more.
Let's do it!💪
This post has been featured in the latest edition of Steem News...
Upvoted. Thank You for sending some of your rewards to @null. It will make Steem stronger.
"🌟 Great post @remlaps! 🤔 You're absolutely right that downvoting is a tricky thing, but I love the idea of creating a "guaranteed vote" system where authors can request an accurate appraisal from curators. 💡 The concept of using a specific tag like "#thegauntlet" to signal a post's quality and request feedback is genius! 🤩 Can't wait to see how this plays out and how it can help promote attractive content on Steem. 👏 What are your thoughts, community? 🤔 Let's keep the conversation going and make Steem an even better platform for all creators! 💪"