I fully agree that downvotes are needed, that nothing is stolen, and communist seems very overstated... :)
I downvoted before they were free. I selectively read before I upvote and before I downvote. I don't consider who the author is and instead I try to objectively consider the content, relevance and engagement
If 10 people read a post and like it ... they can upvote it.
2 people hate it they can downvote it.
Most simply ignore it.
That is the wisdom of the crowd.
A group of people colluding on who votes too much for what, with complete disregard to the content or quality of the posts and with no communicated standards.
People are getting revenge downvoted, it doesn't take a lot of empathy to understand why this would shake up a small community. Not everyone knows who is on what team. All they see is a bunch of powerful people (stake, not skills or knowledge)
Don't take my word on it, just consider it.
'Wisdom of the crowd' applies when 1 voice is one piece of wisdom.
When 1 voice is wroth 50 xtimes the voice of another, it becomes 'wisdom of the oligarchs'.
A massive difference, and one that can't be changed, here.
The market knows - and see's - the difference, even if the oligarchs here are willfully blind to the flawed structure.
DPOS doesnt have to work like this, btw
Imagine 1 voice 1 vote on content, and 'dividend' payouts, annually, instead - based on the price of steem and the proportion of it that you hold/time over the year... THAT could be steem price rocketing! - (every one's headed in the same direcion then as well....Like we almost have the same vision, or something).
(no pedantic definitions of 'dividends' needed, ty -it was tho most effort I was going to put into painting the picture).
No salt, just sense.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
There are self voters with big and with small stake. Your sense doesn't apply here.
1 voice 1 vote isn't possible due to reasons explained hundred of times already - there's no way to limit someone to one account on the Internet. None, whatever idea you might try to come up with, it won't work.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm glad you enlightened me. I'll stop thinking now, and join the rest of ya..lol
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You can of course keep thinking and try to solve a problem as old as p2p networks. Computer scientists all over the world will bow down before you when you do find the solution. One that doesn't require sending our IDs to Steemit Inc and letting them regulate access to the blockchain at least ;)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybil_attack
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
How cool is that?
I might start thinking again.....
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Of course if one person had one vote - on content - and payouts were yearly based purely on stake size -then there would be no financial incentive to use numerous accounts to upvote posts....zero.
This way - everyone would want to be upvoting what they saw as the best quality posts of their genre- to make the site more attractive-to attract more users- to grow the price- to get bigger payouts at the end of the year.
Just sayin'...
...the answers are easy - it's asking the right questions that can be tricky.
I'll stop thinking now, my nose has started to bleed...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If I understand right you suggest to get rid of content rewards? What would be the incentive for authors?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
....to build a place that people want to put their eyes on, want to come to.
..thus increasing it's value, and the price goes up -thus higher payouts after the year..
Give each new user 30 steem (or whatever) to be able to post - locked in for the year.
Any increase in price, the money would be deducted from the growth - a net zero cost for steeminc.
For simplicity sake.....the price on joining is 10 cents per steem, the price after the year - and they decide to withdraw - and the price is then 20 cents.
The proportion they are entitled to is, say, $60 - they get $30. (the initial steem given to be able to post, is deducted).
Minus value - under $30 - it stays locked in. It's a win win.
It would give incentive people to put money into steem also, that way - you will be backing your own stables, ( not your own horse).
Then it comes down to all of us pulling in the one direction- to get the price higher, through improving the quality content of the site, and increasing eyes on it.
A common goal for all (one missing entirely at the moment).
Create the demand through increasing quality -It's always been a good strategy.
(My consultation fees are very reasonable, btw).
My nose is really bleeding quite heavily, now...lol
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
A bit hard to follow you, hope my nose doesn't start bleeding too in the process.
If everyone gets the same returns, depending on investment only, what's the incentive to produce quality content? The votes, like Reddit mana?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You hit the nail on the head. It's not the "wisdom of the crowd" downvotes that irk me as content creator. In fact, I don't remember ever getting one of those, and very seldom feeling the need to give one. It's the "a group of people colluding" downvotes that bring my blood to boiling point. Not because of the few pennies it might cost me, but on account of the injustice of it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Pharsim is inspiring.
I just came down off a downvoting binge courtesy of a lovely list.
I also downvoted before it was cool. There were more things to downvote back then, too.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I didn't ask him not to downvote. I downvote also! :) I suggested he consider how it might feel and look to the community. :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
A lot of the community is confused. I don't know very many people getting downvoted for abuse, I know a few getting it for revenge. They generally understand why and maybe just regret following trails, etc.
I think it's those negligible -10% votes from accounts with less than 50sp that are confusing people.
It's confusing me to. What is the point?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit