You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why the Whale War might be good for Steemit
This largely seems to be based on the assumption that most downvotes are deserved. In my experience, that is not always the case. Also, the reason for the downvote is disagreement on rewards payout, then why would 0 be the threshold? Just because you don't believe that a post should make $500 doesn't mean that it should make 0.
As I said, Steem is based on most stakeholders voting in the network's interest (which if the system is properly designed will also be in their personal interest). If this is true, then most of the time when a downvote is not deserved people will come together to counter it with upvotes. If that's what generally happens and if when it happens the downvoter suffers a penalty then continued abusive downvoting becomes much less likely. If most of the stakeholders are malicious and will downvote good content just to watch the world burn, no protocol change will save the network.
The change I propose would make downvoting less useful for rewards disagreement, but I see that as a much less serious issue than outright abuse. It's imperfect, but I still think it would be an improvement.