The Value of Downvotes Explained
Are you bored, uncertain about the future, and reading this? If so, consider the Steem rabbithole. You'll have the best time of your life. Guaranteed. Come and join us in this nightmare-mode of a game. Disclaimer: this post should not be taken as financial advice. It's entertainment, engineered for dramatic effect.
Now with the recent conflict that's happening, it would seem like Steem has unveiled part of its value proposition. Check this quote out:-
Humans seem to love drama. When there's not enough around, we create it. If you're looking for some good drama, follow Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies. That's the good stuff.
by @lukestokes
It's really the good stuff. Cryptos gave birth to a new age of drama. It's the new oil of the 21st century. A clash of personalities, if you will. So what better way to facilitate drama at the speed of light than a fast social network like Steem that enables downvotes?
Built on real economics
Think about Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. You can virtually dish out an unlimited number of likes on those platforms. How is this ever based on real economics? Most of the experiences on thise platforms are fake! Okay, not really. But I just read an article on Medium and it allows me to like (or in this case, clap) more than once just by holding down the button. What a joke, I clapped 50 times. See how easy it is to manipulate any platforms that runs on unlimited amounts of non stake-weighted likes for engagement? Now, what happens when unlimited likes become limited investments? People become a little bit more serious with their votes. Expect the real kind of drama that fires up great discussions that we can all learn from. It's a feature, one that builds relationships. People become investors as they become more invested in high-quality drama.
But okay, quite frankly, I'm biased. I've come to terms that I'm hopelessly invested in the community. It would've been *cough* easy for me to cash it all out and sail the into the sunset with my imaginary waifu. But there's just something about Steem that's so precious, at least to me. So I became a lurker on the platform, getting to know people inside out by reading their stuff. I know it sounds creepy. But don't worry, I only know where you kept your favourite polkadot underwear.
The drama of downvotes
Steem is a platform that works with both upvotes and downvotes. That's why Steem has value. It doesn't run on unlimited likes. With that, comes downvotes as a way to regulate supply. Real economics is impossible without it. In a true social platform just like in real life, expect that not everything will go your way all the time even if you're busting your ass.
Resources are simply limited. Maybe the registration screen should have a quiz for new users to answer successfully to manage expectations before they get an account. But maybe the drama is essential.
Sidenote: The myth of one identity per vote
Also, I've seen the same comments emerge again that Steem shouldn't be based on stake-weight voting, but one vote per identity. Bad news, I think it's an impossibility. People with enough tricks up their sleeves will be able to fake identities anyway, generating disproportionate amounts votes for themselves.
Now imagine the shitshow when it comes to online platforms where anyone can create gazillions of free accounts. At least with stakes, there is capital involved. Remember that your free Steem account actually costs something. Not only that, buying into stakes effectively makes it an investment which makes investors invested like Warren Buffet, and that could benefit the network as a whole.
Somewhat relevant shameless plug!
To be honest, I've managed to stay out of any drama myself as an early-adopter by informing some of my auto-voting supporters to lower their voting weight on my posts. Regardless, I'm still having a lot of fun goofing around with my posts, enjoying decent views and interactions even without the luxury of top-stream trending. That said, I do spend good amounts of time engaging with new members and connecting people from different disciplines on the platform. I'm also a dummy when it comes to diversifying my votes without aiming for maximum returns. Thanks for the experience. Your continued support and engagement is always appreciated now that I'm posting less these days to avoid unnecessary scrutiny.
And okay, I avoid drama on myself, but nevertheless, it seems that I love lurking around it. Funny that I've never cared for drama before Steemit. It's interesting and a good way to observe human behaviour, despite the unnecessary insults that happen from time to time. All said, there are things I'd like to flag but I don't think I'll enjoy the retaliation since people tend to take it personally. But feel free to flag my stuff, anytime you don't agree with payout or whatever. /end_shameless_dramatic_plug
Conclusion
Drama is the spice of life and could be the main driving factor of value for cryptocurrencies and.. Steem. So let's exploit this. Terrible idea, perhaps! Straight to the point, downvoting is the reality of a new social network like this one. I don't think it would be possible without such a function. So ultimately, the understanding of downvotes need to be learned and mastered. Top authors will always get scrutinised, no two ways about it.
Oh, by the way, I wrote about downvote selling about two weeks ago and not surprisingly, it seems to be emerging now. Anyway, I'll leave you guys with an old post of mine (disregard the bit about dollarvigilante in the linked post): The Art of Maintaining Reputation: Plan Your Battles and Don't Milk It!
Sorry, did I really make the point about the value of downvotes?
Great post as always Kevin. One of the ways I look at it is that it's basically impossible to solve the problem of "How do you know someone on the internet is real?" so effectively what we do is we say that someone's "realness" is proportionate to their stake. You prove your identity by acquiring stake. Of course, you can still acquire other accounts, but again they only influence anything if they have stake. If they have enough stake, in the eyes of the Steem Blockchain that account is real too. I do think there will be interesting opportunities with SMTs to introduce different types of identity verification measures that enable different schemes. If one can develop an oracle system which guarantees that one real individual is associated with only one account, you could alter the distribution mechanism and take into account that information. But IMO, there will always have to be a stake-weighted upvote/downvote system in place for the cryptoeconomics to work, one just might be able to alter the parameters based on additional information.
Nice post! What will happening, if someone resteem your post?
I think it really changes the face of discussions and establishment of trust when stakes are involved. Will be interesting to see oracles that can successfully tackle the problem of identity well enough without being too intrusive when it's out!
Well, why not 2FA? It's not like you'd have to reinvent the wheel. While some folks have more than one phone (I have... umm.. 5?) that at least is dramatic limitation on bots.
Then we'd need your phone number.
You got it when I signed up. The same as every account created through Steemit.com.
Bots just use fake, or temporary numbers, which 2FA would end.
Yes, you're right that was a brain-fart. We do ask for your phone number. My assumption is that the engineers determined that the costs of requiring that every user enable 2FA before being able to get an account (in terms of increasing barriers to entry and adding an extra step to the sign up process) outweigh the costs. Most people want us to be decreasing the friction in the sign up process not increasing it. But thanks for your feedback.
This might be an opportune time to examine the results of that decision, as but ~11% of accounts opened in 2016 - including bots - remain active.
Most people have been leaving. I'll take fewer signups, in exchange for a better retention rate, if that's the cost.
The following quote from your post points to one of key reasons I see decentralized social media like Steemit succeeding:
People will see true value in the things that are upvoted because up-voters are incentivized to only approve of meaningfully well produced content; Theoretically.
Of course you get problems like up-voting bots intended to maximize curation rewards, but I still think the Steemit approval system is objectively better than the approval system of something like Facebook. The Facebook like, and even their "friend" system are in my mind relatively weightless and therefore meaningless.
Facebook: Friend anyone, like everything.
Steemit: Follow meaningful content creators, upvote great content, downvote bad.
Not necessarily downvote bad per se, but it'd be up to investors (anyone on the platform) to decide what's best for the network, although their assessment might not actually be optimal.
Thanks for sharing! A link to your post was included in the Steem.center wiki article about Flag. Thanks and good luck again!
Thanks @steemcenterwiki, it's not exactly written for wikis, hope it's a fit though!
We included it in the links suggestions, we think it can help people go deeper in the subject and compare different points of view if they want. Thanks and good luck again!
It's a strange world these days. One thing that has really helped me in life is that when things are great in life I never get too up...and when things are really bad in life I never get too down. Stability is attractive.
Not an easy practice, but we always try, do we not? :)
you are right
bro please follow me and vote me..
You should only comment if you are adding value to the discussion. If you are just asking for votes and follows, you will be flagged (this hurts your reputation) If you don't have something important to say, it is best not to say it. Just some advice so you don't get flagged in the future.
So if someone does not like your opinion or view they can downvote your and use their power. That sounds like BULLYING. Can we not all grow up? Is there not safeguards in place to combat this behavior? Why can't Steemit hold a higher standard? Must we stoop to the level of Facebook or Twitter? Come on folks! There is enough drama in this old world. Let's show we are more cultured, educated and human. If you disagree you can always walk away and not comment or respond. A friend of mine once gave me some sound advice years ago ...Troy pick your fights very carefully in life. Let that sink in a moment. Let's all uplift each other and build each other to higher standard of interaction. Thanks for the post.
On the internet, it's not so much bullying but rather people freely expressing themselves. Perhaps honestly, perhaps trollishly. It's hard to tell. My stance however is that anyone shouldn't feel offended. Bullying is more like doxxing innocent folks when it comes to the internet, in my opinion.
Agree with this, but I understand some would feel suspicious as there could be be folks taking advantage of others with sweet talk. Maybe their right about it, maybe not..
Or ransomware. Which actually is quite similar in effect to flags, as both extract economic resources based on unequal power, ransomware due to power of knowledge of code, and flags due to power of stake.
Both are bullying.
Just read the comments @berniesanders leaves when flagging some account into the dust. He's bullying. He proclaims it. Pretending he's selflessly balancing rewards for the good of the platform is facile, unless by balance you mean concentrate in the wallets of whales, because that's the outcome of his bullying.
It sure isn't to spread the rewards to quality posts - which are difficult to find in the autovote infested trending page.
Captchas, and 2FA, either or both, would end the problem of bots.
Downvotes are very popular on other platforms. Try to find a youtube vid with more than 500 view with no thumbs down. lol The only difference is downvotes are less common on steemit because everyone is so worried about offending the wrong person. To me, a downvote is not that bad. We are so willing to accept the upvotes because they bring money, but to me as an artist, I am used to critiques, so I take the good with the bad. Most people whining about downvotes would never whine about getting more rewards on a post than "deserved" or expected. Awww poor them they only got $86 for a meme, rather than their usual $150. Some people need attention more than money it seems. lol
The best was in 2016, some freaked out when their 4-figure earnings turned 3-figure lol. Absolutely mindblowing.
lmao spoiled brats.
I forgot to add that it's per post!
In our world, crypto-currencies now generally need to look at everything that can have a positive effect on progress, including our ecosystem. Therefore, the communication to downvote in my opinion is another opportunity and pouchavstvoat this budet interesting and profitable for us all. Thank you @kevinwong
Yes, I guess it just takes time for back and forth communication, which is why if users depend on the blockchain to do so, something fast like Steem should do well.
Totally agree with you, my friend, the process will be over time!
Interesting concept, so would weight/steem power factor into the downvotes?
That could really kill someone's post if a whale downvoted, lol. Would the post go negative, monetarywise? Not that that would be a bad thing. It seems there has been a flock of plagiarism in some post I see from people just trying to get an upvote, at least in the new section, maybe I should be more selective of who I follow.
I definitely like the idea of a downvote, as I try to find and upvote ones that post thoughtful and original content, but sometimes it is hard to know what is real vs what is just re-hashed content, as some people don't always note their source, or present stuff in a way that implies the content is their own. However, at the same time I like to avoid drama and would not want to be associated with a downvote unless it was anonymous, but that also takes away from the transparency.
Yes all votes are stake-weighted. Payouts won't go negative, just zero in the least,which is the same as a facebook post. Reputation points are a different matter though, it can go negative. But only if flagged by a high rep account.
Over time, I'm getting more and more convinced that curating accounts are way better than curating pure content. But that means one has to observe an account's activities over time to establish trust, which usually leads to autovoting to support. But of course, the trust can also be broken. Good thing content is transparent for the community to check from time to time if there's abuse.
I think this was one of your most enjoyable posts in recents weeks. Loved your angle on votes/likes. I did get this though "I'm posting less these days to avoid unnecessary scrutiny", maybe I'm missing some information. Keep the lighthearted post coming :)
Oh I've never got into any trouble just by avoiding the perception that I'm milking it. Master of illusion ;) lol
I find it difficult to get in trouble on steemit :)
I don't think this is a flaw in Steemit. We need ways to control abuse and some whales are doing a good job of that. It can just be hard to judge what is abuse in some cases. At this stage I think there should be more rewards for new people doing good stuff to help build the platform. If it mostly goes to a chosen few then many will give up