RE: Downvote Pool Deep Dive

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Downvote Pool Deep Dive

crypticat in #steem • 6 years ago

Two different things. Instead of punishing people I am suggesting we focus in preventative measures. If there is a system in place to limit spam, we won't need free upvotes which can be abused. So we could limit the value of spamming so people don't do it, make it cost more than it is worth.
We want to limit the freedom of spammers, I should have the freedom of not seeing spam and the freedom to restrict micro upvote bots from stealing the curation on my posts.
I am suggesting curation is raised slightly, some people are suggesting 50-50. I think 33% curators, 67% author. But the author should be able to select and blacklist certain curators. Maybe a comment can be required and needs to be upvoted by the author for extra curation or the curator has to follow the author. This gives more freedom to the author to dish out rewards that used to go to them.

Posted using Partiko Android

6 years ago in #steem by crypticat

0.00 BPC

Sort:

Trending

[-]

baah (1) 6 years ago

0.00 BPC

Reveal Comment

[-]

crypticat 6 years ago

There is a difference between punishment and prevention. Not all preventative measurements are punishments and not all punishments are preventative. There are random downvotes which are more of an attack than a punishment as they aren't punishing anything. There are preventative measures such as RC limits which are not punishments. I don't want to talk philosophy here.

Providing free downvotes will lead to abuse, they need to have a cost for a reason. Downvotes are not the only form of punishment. If Steem is to become more popular we need to limit this libertarian concept of absolute freedom, libertarians are a small minority which scare away a majority. I should be able to filter who can comment and upvote me.

If someone wants to go through the effort of preventing everyone from upvoting them so be it, thousands of accounts can be created each day. If I don't want micro upvotes worth less than a thousandth of a Steem then what's the problem?

Preventing some bot from commenting or voting on a blog is not akin to Orwell's s ministry of truth. I fail to see the connection you are trying to make here. Are you trying to prove my point? SPAM is what comes out of the ministry of truth. Ignorance is strength. Repeated unwanted messages are propaganda.

It's very easy to determine what spam is. It is irrelevant or in appropriate messages or comments. It is also a repeated message sent indiscriminately to a large amount of people. A spam filter is a great idea, we can all set our own tolerances that is my point.

Maybe you didn't read my blog on spam mentions and comments, sometimes I get 20 or 30 a day and it would be very beneficial to block this nonsense.

Posted using Partiko Android

0.00 BPC

[-]

baah (1) 6 years ago

0.00 BPC

Reveal Comment

[-]

crypticat 6 years ago

You're telling me to leave your safe space of Libertarianism and Anarchy? That's rich!

Most people here are Capitalists, it's a cryptocurrency after all and profit can be obtained. I'll hand it to you that the decentralized aspect is Libertarian in nature and I like it. I'm not proposing more central authority here, I am proposing more control over an individuals Steem experience through the ability to create one's own filters. We can already create sidechains with these customizable filters, why not extend it to Steem?

Posted using Partiko Android

0.00 BPC

1 vote

[-]

baah (1) 6 years ago

0.00 BPC

Reveal Comment

[-]

crypticat 6 years ago

Maybe 3 years ago most people on Steemit were Anarchists. Steemit changed in 2018, when the Anarchists sold out to the Capitalists. Most people here just want Steem to increase in value. Sure we all like decentralization but most people's freedom has a price.

Posted using Partiko Android