You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Embracing Linear Equality on Steem: Unlearning the Sucker & Maximising the Arsehole in Me

in #funny7 years ago (edited)

Why cant downvoting have the same curation rewards as upvoting?
It is exactly the same, you say the post is valuable and i say no.
Why is my no devalued by the math?

Sort:  

current math says that the linear value of the positive vote must negate the value of an existing positive vote

if a new math comes into place to reserve say any where between equal relative curation (around 25% - it can be set between the total flagged and negated flagged amount which is fundamentally 0% to 50%) value as curation, then so be it. Computation for a non linear or super-linear will be more intensive but it can still be simplified and done.

fundamentally, the answer is yes, it can be architect-ed and implemented.

Then serious coders have to code in the curation amount for flags.

I actually propose that Witnesses and Coders support a variable say between 5% to 50%, and let all the witness agree to set that amount much like the SBD to Steem ratio (Note the minimal 5% is token amount to give value to flagging which we do not today, and depends on the good whale to do so). This will spur the blockchain community leaders and witnesses to increase incentive to auto-correct when there are a multitude of bad-actors.

However, once again, witnesses supported by Steemit Inc (due to large bias of whale & Steemit ownership of Steem) has to agree to such a radical idea to fork.

@NED, @SNEAK, @ANDRARCHY ...... Please Consider Dynamic Curation For Flagging Of Bad Actors

Yep, and stinc prefers scammers to real users,...

You would have a lot of greedy flaggers flagging everyone they dislike or don't agree with or envy...it would be a monkey shit storm making flagging profitable!

Its not really profitable, you would still lose ~75% of your vote.

And even if that was the case, we need to learn to work together to stop abuse and protect our right to speak freely.