You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Why you can't attract upvotes?

in #steem7 years ago

Noticing a problem is the first step for solving it. So it's important that you are bringing this up.

But we should also think about this quite carefully as incentives can easily backfire. Don't forget that this situation was at least partially caused by the latest hardfork which was supposed to incentivize something else.

The most important question to ask before making drastic changes to the way things work, is What could go wrong?. With anything major, there is a lot that could go wrong and backfire and we should think about that.

For instance, would curation lotteries really stimulate whales to curate more? An incentive like that would stimulate people to try to upvote what has been upvoted by whales already, so they get a chance at the large reward while whales would have an incentive to upvote the most unpopular content so they have a higher chance of keeping their curation rewards. Why would whales curate at all in this situation? This lottery would most likely take away their curation rewards and distribute them to other votes. So if whales want a return on their investment into Steem, curation would not be a valuable option anymore, so this would only incentivize self-voting even more as it will become the only real way to create an income based on the Steem Power you hold. In my option, this would by no means be healthy for the Steem ecosystem.

Sort:  

the Lottery points should not be equal between upvoters, each upvoter should get lottery entries equal to the steem power they have, for example:

a user with 100 SP gets one entry
a user with 200 SP gets two entries

i guess that would be a fair chance for all

So why get chance involved then anyway? It will just make curation rewards inconsistent. People with a lot of steem power would still view this as a potential loss while those with little would view it as a potential gain.

Also, if you want it to be fair, you get rid of the lottery. Lotteries are not a great way to be fair.

well, i don't like lottery, and never participated in any, but sounded to me like a good possible way to distribute

Well, I think we should ask if it will bring incentives to people to act in a more desirable way than they are acting now. And I think we should ask that question before we make suggestions.

My opinion is that the lottery is not a good idea at all.

I'm undecided on the 50/50 thing but I have doubts about its fairness too.

wish if there was more democracy on steemit, like a house and congress instead of only witnesses to decide everything

Technically and ideologically, I think the witnesses thing is indeed intended to be a democracy. But I don't see them voting and discussing hardforks and the way hardforks arrive seems to be 100% centralized in practice.

i don't know about that, i don't see all witnesses are in one line, i know that they are in competition to climb up the ladder to earn better blocks rewards.
however, even witnesses voting system isn't fair, it looks like it's all about the SP there too, while i think it should be about numbers, but still it's risky to do that, because a witness can create many fake accounts and vote for himself,
so again, witnesses are controlled by the whales (Steem lobbyists)

it's really confusing, it's a mess and needs to be organized