You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Only-Upvote-Others-Athon - Join Up, It's Free :)
That's an interesting proposal (from @liberosist), but how does it improve the user/bot ratio.
I'm trying to be as honest about the potential and the difficult learning and earning curves here with potential users and newbies (myself included).
Well, right now our VP starts to decay after only 10 votes, beyond what can be recharged each day, but never goes to zero. People can only vote so many posts (substantively). I averaged over 100 votes a day, until I read the white paper and learned that my VP could not recharge until I stopped just voting for what I liked.
So bots can vote thousands of times a day now, and each vote, while of low power, will deliver rewards. Bots can mine much more SP from the rewards pool than people now.
Under @liberosist's proposal, bots would no longer be able to mine more rewards than a person, because VP would decay to nothing. Their ability to keep voting 24/7/365 would no longer be an advantage over people, who can read and curate only ~100 posts a day (YMMV).
Since the number of posts has risen by about 1000% since HF19 was first considered, and HF19 decreased the number of votes we can cast by 400%, the result has been the desperation you can read commenters here expressing, and resulted in self votes - which further decreases the votes available per post.
Increasing full power votes to what people can actually cast, and limiting voting to what people can do helps to keep curation a human activity, rather than susceptible to rewards pool mining bots.
It also helps to throw votes to new users, and this helps to encourage them to stay and build the community, which they will not do if they can't get votes.