You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: downvoting from anyone that reduces payout because they think the post isn't deserving is wrong

in #steemit • 9 years ago

I disagree and think this this post and this post by @demotruk are great counter arguments, better than I could make it, especially the idea that up / down voting should be seen as a way to influence how much you think a post should be worth, not a measure of how "good" or "bad" it is, or your are an author.

To quote from the second, earlier post:

One of the main reasons we argue over payouts is because the system isn't actually working to achieve the purpose described above. [...] we can only say "I think this post is worth more" and "I think this post is worth less". There are big problems with this. Worth more than what? [...]

In practice it seems like an up vote and down vote mostly say, and are interpreted as "This post is good" and "This post is bad" or as above "This post is abusive". Yet those don't even answer the question which the vote is asking, and very frequently they are also not what the voter had in mind. Sometimes the amounts that are paid out may not reflect the intentions of any of the voters.

They then go on to outline a proposal for "Payout Recommendations", which is interesting and it gets to the core of what down voting because of payout is really about.

9 years ago in #steemit by
$0.29
  • Past Payouts $0.29
  • - Author $0.27
  • - Curators $0.02
11 votes
Reply 7
Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     9 years ago (edited) 
    $0.92
    • Past Payouts $0.92
    • - Author $0.69
    • - Curators $0.23
    Reveal Comment
    [-]
     9 years ago  

    Indeed, I am for removing flagging from everyone by default, and only allowing it for active users who are part of the community, and then we all have the ability to deal with abuse. Then sock puppet accounts can't just have SP and go flagging. AND the flagging won't be base don SP, just like the upvotes won't be. Everyone will have equal ability to influence content and be driven by the community. STEEM and SP is investment to earn as the value grows, your investment grows. And the community is what grows it. SO why would a concentrated group of people be in charge of what the community can or can't do if the community are actually the one's who grow the community and the content? Concentration of power needs to go! Thanks for the feedback.

    [-]
     9 years ago  

    "To build a system of decentralized governance all people must have some direct control over the allocation of public resources, the editing of laws, and the rendering of opinion. Furthermore, all people must take a risk of loss with every act of governance they take. Without the risk of loss no true measurement of value can be made and no opinion can be trusted. You cannot even trust your own opinion unless you take actions that risk personal loss if your opinion is out of alignment with reality. The greater the risk you are willing to take the stronger your faith in your opinion and the greater your resulting profit or loss will be."

    "It is through the iterative process of taking risks and realizing profit and loss that truth can be distilled from the mass of dissenting opinions. Those who act wisely grow in influence, those who act poorly shrink. Overtime the Darwinian process of survival of the fittest takes over and the aggregate outcome of the governance improves in quality, quantity, and efficiency just like what happens in the free market." Dan Larimer

    The upvotes and downvotes have to be based on SP. This is one of the core tenet Steem is based on. Ultimately what we risk on is our life.

    $0.00
      Reply
      [-]
       9 years ago  

      so if @krnel had simply accepted being flagged to reduce rewards, and kept on blogging without making any drama about it, he/she would have been much better off surviving on steemit, as "those who act poorly shrink" and "those who act wisely grow in influence"

      $0.00
        Reply
        [-]
         9 years ago (edited) 

        First of all I want to make this clear, @krnel is one of my favorite author and one of the person I most identify with and he knows this as I made it clear to him in the past. He's the author I've read the most.

        The situation is a complex one and yes it's true that time could have help. Not everything happen instantaneously. Also nothing is clear as night and day. I understand both sides.

        Ultimately we should strive to uplift and unite. I think we should always consider trying to convince rather than to confront if confrontation can be avoided.

        Also its good to read from you Craig. You should do more written articles.