On one hand, I find it hard to feel a lot of sympathy for posts still generating over $100 in rewards post-downvote, but on the other, I have seen widespread downvote bickering and witch hunts while the recent crypto spike seems to leave a lot of copy/pasted spam unaddressed.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think downvoting has some value and is probably necessary to prevent major exploits of the system. Proof of stake was always going to be contentious when shared pots of money are being distributed and ultimately could lead to a complete mirror of the centralisation we see outside of the 'decentralised' sphere. The community valuing and ultimately agreeing to share money to people based on their content is still a relatively new thing for the web and there will no doubt be many twists and turns along the way. The key is always going to be to ensure that the actions of key actors are visible to the whole community so that they can know who to support with upvotes/downvotes and witness votes to ensure their vision stands the best chance of coming to life on Hive. This is part of why my suggestion for a list that shows the most downvoted posts on Hive is such a promising one.
I am also weighing whether I should create a community people can join to share and upvote content they believe has been abusively downvoted. My hesitation is due to the work it would probably take to vet posts and moderate conversations. I anticipate a lot of angry self-righteous spammers at first, too.
@freezepeach already does this, I'm sure they would appreciate any help you can provide. Currently they lack stake.
I offered to delegate some HP, but I think they have other plans. Besides, there would be little harm in multiple downvote mitigation efforts. I just need to figure out whether I can muster the effort personally.
This is the case where I understand the "disagreement on rewards" reason for downvoting. At least on some level. Although not on the level of downvoting the given post to 0. There should be some kind of balance. There is definitely a problem with the reward distribution and with the visibility. Some authors getting more than $100, while most people do not even get few dollars.