Easier said then down of course. Which I know, or I think is the point of your post to encourage downvoting as a positive instead of a negative. Discussion or changing the discussion is one way to start, but how do go about removing the fear of downvoting then beocoming a target?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Creating a method of down voting the excessive upvote, instead of downvoting the poster. You punish the excessive vote giver, not the vote receiver.
Are you saying that the negative effect on reputation from a down vote should be removed?
Lets say whale 5 gives you a vote with a value of $500.00. Whale 3 thinks that is way way off the mark, so they down vote YOU 100%, which happens to take you from a reputation of 60 to a reputation of 25. Is that fair to you? Did you ask whale 5 for 500 dollars? Did whale 3 see that it was whale 5 that gave you 500 dollars? Did I as a drive by steemit surfer, bother to look at your post that was greyed out because of a whale vote? What I am saying is if it is a disagreement about money, then the person giving the excessive money is the one who should take the hit, not the person who just posted their thoughts ideas or dreams. The poster did nothing wrong or deceitful. They did not ask, beg, borrow, or steal the 500 dollar vote, (they may have had a heart attack, I know I would), but they did nothing wrong. Why should they be punished?
It's a good point, but you should be accurate - you cannot down vote an account, you can only down vote a post. Whale 3 down votes a post, and this indirectly has negative effect on your rep if and only if the post goes into negative rewards (you can't see this in the steemit.com UI, it just shows zero, but it's recorded).
It's up to Whale 3 to be responsible enough to just counter the rewards they think should be countered. The UI could help with this simple calculation if the Whale is not bothered to do it themselves.
I understand your point. But we should not restrict the possibility of this situation on the blockchain, we should just support positive action and warn of potential common mistakes in the UI (like we do with transfers for example).
I am still new, August 1, 2017. So I am still learning and trying to remember the different terminology used. The person may only be downvoting a Post, but it does affect the posters account and rep. I know because I was downvoted without cause very early on by bernie and his house of 52 cards, (52 down votes), that did affect my reputation. Fortunately I knew about cheetah, steamcleaners, and @timcliff, and they fixed things for me.
But yes when it is strictly a money/reward issue, it is not always the posters fault.
I think reserving a "downvote of the rep" for flags might be a good idea. Keeping it separate from "dislikes".
This is exactly what @aggroed is suggesting below and it's something I've supported in the past too. I think it's still a good idea, but now in my opinion the better one is what @timcliff suggests
I don't think the two concepts clash though. On a fundamental level, they are both sounds and could be implemented side by side, could they not?
Edit: Duplicate. Tried editing the first comment so that it didn't say "sounds" and this is what happened.
I'm assuming what you're saying is not actually about "punishing" the upvoter, but rather neutralizing his vote.
No, just the opposite. If a person gives an excessive upvote, they are the ones that should be punished. maybe not to reputation, but perhaps for the next 30 days put on a vote limit. strict 10 times a day only and at 1/100 of what their vote would normally be valued at.
Now what would this do? It would curtail vote selling,vote buying, and mean that they would not be able to use for those 30 days a vote curation trail. Their account value remains unaffected, their ability to <b.earn is all that is affected.
Vote negation I can get onboard with as well if done correctly and with enough safeguards, but "punishing" would be a lot more offensive and risky than "restricting".
https://steemit.com/downvoting/@thatanimesnob/an-easy-way-to-find-and-eradicate-self-voters-like-checkthisout-and-moses153
It will likely be a process, with some bumps along the road.