You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: SteemFest² Speakers Inspire My New Upvoting System!
Half-handed attempts at shaming will do nothing to prevent people from aligning their actions with game-theory.
I seriously doubt that holding our witnesses accountable for their decisions qualifies as shaming and I am sure that Jerry is not as delicate as you think.
I understand that people will game the system, but if everyone went this route Steemit would fail.
Since Jerry is running for witness he really should be above reproach.
If want to stop auto-voting, it must be disabled technically. If that is not possible, you are wasting your efforts.
If enough people voice their opinions about automatic voting, maybe the witnesses like Jerry might change the code before it's too late.
"I seriously doubt that holding our witnesses accountable for their decisions qualifies as shaming"
That's great? I didn't say it did. You seem to have assumed I meant that, which is understandable, but I didn't.
You'll note my support for removing Craig Grant votes going back almost as long as my blog does. Just a single example, but I don't believe in trying to control how others use their stake outside of clear shenanigans like referral link for Bitconnect/Genesys pushers.
"I am sure that Jerry is not as delicate as you think."
You don't know what I think about Jerry, so at best, this is baseless speculation, while in actuality, it is false. I am on the record repeatedly praising how Jerry generally handles criticism.
"If enough people voice their opinions about automatic voting, maybe the witnesses like Jerry might change the code before it's too late."
I agree that this is a valid path for this grievance.
However, have you bothered to look into whether it is TECHNICALLY POSSIBLE to do what you ask? I'm not sure that it is. Perhaps you can stop Steemvoter, or other specific creations that attach to an API...
How will you ever stop client side scripting? I can write a bot to type or vote for me entirely on the client side by pixel matching get.pixel colors. You can't distinguish it from a normal click without substantial data and machine learning.
Can we establish that this is even possible before we leave Rome on a massive war-time campaign?
PS - Philosophically, we are aligned, but I gave up swimming against the tide. Technically, it seems impossible to stop, even if we had witness consensus for a fork. I don't know how to technically achieve it, which makes discussing it a pointless venture.
Thanks for the discussion.
The only way would be to change the incentives. Shaming will do no good, as you say, or won't do much good in the long term.
We must change the incentives! The way for long term valuable content to be valued probably involves -
Lengthening payout time or creating drip faucets on locked articles based on views or under certain favorable conditions.
Considering a negative incentive for upvoting (probably automatically) an artivle that turns out to be worthless or of detracting value.
Basically we need more levers, we need more experiments!
Thanks Lex for cutting through the feelings to try to see the truth.
"Lengthening payout time or creating drip faucets on locked articles based on views or under certain favorable conditions."
This is an awesome idea. I think we should definitely implement it based on traffic brought to the Steemit website!
I tell you all my great ideas because you seem like a guy who know how to get things done! 😃