You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why We Can't Have Nice Things...
We can pool upvotes via bidbots. Why can't we pool downvotes?
My downvote by itself will be as insignificant as before. Free downvotes dont change a thing.
The ability to delegate the downvote pool would be logical. Why are we breaking the symmetry here? It's a missed opportunity.
At least it will generate some dRama
Posted using Partiko Android
I'm fighting hard for downvote delegation. I really feel this is key to the success of quality negative curation.
I really hope that happens. Otherwise there is no point in that pool.
Have you seen reasonable arguments against it or is that a philosophical thing?
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvote delegation is doable.
Just write a bot that can be delegated to. The bot mirrors each delegator's upvotes with voting power equal to the delegated amount. The downvotes the bot uses as it sees fit in exchange for a small fee.
Because one account being able to transact once per block (there seconds), an array of bot accounts would have to be created for that purpose.
You have to delegate your upvote voting power along with it. The idea is being able to delegate just free downvote power.
I know that. And I pointed out a way to work around that limitation.
Yes, you have to delegate your upvoting and downvoting power together. So what? The bot can do your upvoting on your behalf with voting power commensurate to the voting power you have delegated to it. The downvoting it can do as it sees fit. The end result is that whatever you upvote gets upvoted (by the bot) with the exact same power as before delegating to the bot. Only what is downvoted gets decided by the bot. And if the idea is that it would only use the free downvotes, then that's what it would do and no more. Naturally, the bot would calculate how much it owes you in curation rewards from the upvoting it does on your behalf based on what it sees you upvote by scanning the chain. It might even pay you a bit more as a fee for your letting it use your downvoting power, which it would get as payments from people who want to direct that downvoting power as they see fit.
When you take the second link, the mrsallou account unless he's plagiarizing please do explain to us how him posting several of these feel gooders several times a day is any different then that chbartist (or something of that nature) account that runs two, three post a week on trending for hundreds of dollars isn't the same kind of abuse just done less often for bigger rewards?
It's not different. Chbartist got flagged for a week and powered down.
I admit it's been a bit since I've regularly surfed trending, I am not saying his stuff was bad but the money he was getting for it was absurd to say the least. I questioned him one time if he thought what looked like someone jotting down two, three paragraphs on the back of a bar napkin was worth the money he made off it. All that did it seemed was prompt him to write a post about negativism so I quit following him.
Yeah, that is my fear as well.
I would like to know if some of the T20 brought that up. It's a logical question.
I would love to know the arguments against delegating downvotes.
Why stop halfway? It's so obviously half baked.
As much as I try to ignore this fruitless topic, it keeps luring me in from time to time.
Posted using Partiko Android
it's being discussed.
regarding the half baked... my old company went through this phase too. The guy that solved it called it...
There is never anytime to do anything right but there is always time to do it over... Except no one ever really does it over. I think it is a thing of inexperience and we are loaded with it.
I don't think that's it in this case.
Everybody is talking about delegating All The Time. Why stop now?
This is not a case of experience. It is a case of basic principles. These dudes are programmers. It takes a certain amount of logic to read and understand code.
They are able to make handy charts about payout curves.
They must be aware. Why is nobody of them adressing this issue? There are many many point for point arguments about SPS and EIP. This topic has never been talked about in public by T20.
But at least they promised us so much more manual curation.
Yes, I read your post from yesterday about that :D
Posted using Partiko Android
What if the ~30 people abusing the pool have 500k+ accounts and they like things just fine the way they are?
In fact, 100 years from now they may think they will be worshipped as heroes for having maximized their stake.
More likely the masses will reject them as a git rich quik skeme, imo.
Fiat always goes to zero when those contributing nothing are in control of it.
No wage slave will pay the amount of tax wanted by those that live lavishly while contributing nothing, once those slaves know the truth.
This current set of controllers, locally and wider, have done an excellent job of controlling the narrative.
Wages dont make you free, they keep you on the plantation and buying at the master's store.
Ok, it was taken out of context. I was going in a different direction.
But your answer works as well.
Misaligned incentives.
On your point about fiat. It might go to zero over time. Who cares?
Every currency has one selling point: as a medium of exchange. If you need a store of value you need to look somewhere else.
Posted using Partiko Android