You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: My take on Self-voting, Vote-buying and Reward Pool Rape
Problem is that n^2 leads to centralization and exclusivity. In my opinion, that's not the right way to encourage universality. I think we need to be inclusive and broaden the reward distribution as much as possible. I also argue in favor of the complete elimination of downvoting for the same reasons. My thesis is that if we force ourselves to move forward in the positive, leaving the holding back of others to others, and keep an eye on the widest contributor base possible, with time even the abusers will come round (or go somewhere else 😉).
I also favour the elimination of down- voting. My opinion is just as valid as yours so why should you be able to down vote it? I'm not saying every opinion is right, but every steemian has the right to be heard. Down voting is just a form of censorship. If quality content were actually rewarded then there would be no need for down votes as bad content would never be visible. The issue is with the up voting system, not the down voting system.
I agree with your sentiment but we need to combat spam and plagiarism. I've expressed my opinion here in detail: https://steemit.com/steemit/@vimukthi/a-philosophical-and-economic-outlook-at-steemit-sbd-and-flagging-and-suggestions-for-a-better-future-based-on-positive
Short version is just make flags consume 3% VP instead of 2%. You could even make it 4% and that would really help to make the flagging wars die faster. Positive reinforcement works better than negative reinforcement.
I downvoted a post which took my content off of reddit and was profiting off of it (and they literally shared the post as is - it's not like it was a review or lets play etc - i.e. something transformative). They literally took my content as is and started profiting off of it. I sorted it out with the admins in the end, but downvoting those who steal from others is definitely a legitimate use of downvoting as they shouldn't be doing that shit.
That's an interesting case you raise @birchmark. I hadn't given that scenario any thought. You are absolutely right that others shouldn't profit off your hard work. I'm not sure what the solution is here. I've decided to leave it to those more experienced with Steemit than me to work it out and instead focus on my blog :)
There probably isn't an easy solution to these situations unfortunately - I've also been on YT for about 1 3/4 years and the amount of issues and drama and changing policies over that time has been ridiculous.
I agree with you that when money is involved though people shouldn't be downvoting just because they disagree. I don't think that should be policed or anything, but I believe it is bad etiquette. Even on reddit downvotes are primarily meant for content that doesn't contribute to discussions or is inflammatory / needlessly nasty, not things you merely don't agree with, so people shouldn't really be downvoting comments they simply don't agree with on here either if it is simply part of a discussion and everyone is being civil.
I don't see how this necessarily follows at all. Downvoting is a necessary evil to combat posts that are overvalued due to inorganic voting as one example (a greater evil in my humble opinion). How else would we deal with this?
Those kind will just keep getting more powerful and powerful and bury the potential gold mine of minnow posts in their mediocrity whilst getting paid in doing so.
This, my friend, is something that is contrary to universality or wider appeal to talented users that may not be so affluent to use the "tools" that the not so talented yet affluent use to make a bucks. We are allowing this platform to become a Ponzi scheme of self-voted and bid buying. Flagging may be are only hope of correction but I think we collectively need to realize what is happening and what the implications will be if we do not nip it in the bud now.
Vote me.
https://steemit.com/@mahikaler