You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Thinking out loud: A possible path towards the "crab bucket" concept?
Hmm, I never liked the crab story, same goes for downvotes.
Of course there are overrated posts, but I doubt whether downvotes are the right way to go in this area. In this context, we had previously talked about an investor account, which seems to be difficult to implement. Perhaps an investor community would be a way forward; posts in this special community could be hidden at front-end level, at least in trending.
I've never been a fan of downvotes, either. But it's the only regulatory mechanism that's designed into the blockchain. Over the years, I have reluctantly concluded that they are necessary under the current rewards algorithms.
When we're seeing almost 40% of SP delegated to teams that have near-0 ownership stake in the chain, that's not a healthy dynamic either. Since those delegators are motivated to post daily, I suspect that the percentage of daily posts/rewards is substantially higher than 40%. IMO, the blockchain would be better served using those rewards to recruit legitimate authors. To me, at this point downvoting the worst of the worst is the lesser of two evils - at least in the short term.
Right, something like the investor account could actually be implemented just by turning on SBD interest at a high enough level, but there's probably not much appetite for that unless the price stays stable above the haircut threshold. If we can't eliminate the 0-effort posting, I'd also support hiding it, but that doesn't solve the underlying problem of misdirected social-media rewards.
Longer term, I have always thought we could find a rewards algorithm that would mitigate the need for downvotes, and I still think that's the ideal solution.