You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Changing the Code to Incentivize Curation
Promoting more flagging, and rewarding it, is a horrible idea as far as I'm converned. Anyone can flag others and get paid to do it. It's a recipe for disaster that feeds trolls and bullies. I don't agree with downvoting witnesses either. Anyone with lots of SP can have a grudge and effectively remove someone else in the lower ranks from being a witness at all.
I think this way of re-allocating rewards for posts that get upvoted from vote buying by vote sellers is a good way to get everyone else who doesn't rewarded. There are just some technical issue with implementing it, like determining who is a vote seller or bidbot to annul the rewards on a post and re-allocate it to the reward pool instead.
Flagging with a low rep bot that doesn't affect reputation and doing it at the last minute before payout, removing only the bought votes power will have exactly the same effect as your proposal and won't require code changes or centralization on the chain. It could simply be a community effort with the only change needed besides the free flags/stake is to be allowed to delegate those flags.
Posted using Partiko Android
That still requires a centralized account to do the work, and a centralized team to manage it, with delegated power from accounts that can be traced and retaliated against. The changes I would like to see are coded in and don't require anyone doing anything. The community is an ideal I like, but it isn't as fool proof as a coded change that just takes care of it all.
I too am not a fan of the flagging ( I have only used it on one account that was trolling both Family Protection and Informationwar), however I notice that they are good with it as long as it does not hit them where it hurts.
This feels to be about rewarding those with the highest stake (the top witnesses and their supporters) at the expense of the lower and middle class. What person of talent or person who researches deserves the same share of the rewards. I will use you as an example. You are a researcher/experimenter. No way do any of us (myself included) deserve the same cut you get % for benefiting from your time and effort. We already benefit from the 25%, and we benefit as well from your sifting and presenting your conclusions.
I would like to think the top witnesses would consider your idea if they think there is a problem here greater than their current decreased bidbot profits. However, it feels to me that is really where they and their largest supporters are seeing the problem that needs corrected.