You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Learning from History: One of Steem's "Grand Challenges"
An idea I had that I've been reluctant to openly propose is that we could have the frontend filter out posts that an account has downvoted from their own view of a trending page, so while they individually use their downvotes to "clean up" the trending page they see that results in downvotes organically accumulating on overvalued posts.
Something similar can be achieved by muting these accounts. As @remlaps says, the potential retaliatory nature would make this unattractive for smaller users. In most cases, the retaliation would potentially be small (due to these users delegating everything to the bots).
I'm aware of the retaliation issue, that's why I've been reluctant to suggest this.
The problem I was trying to solve relates to incentives and dynamic effects. When people permanently mute bad actors they put themselves into a position where they no longer see the problem and therefore have little incentive to fix it. I was trying to see if there was a way that people could get what they seem to want (no longer seeing an over-valued post) but with a good side-effect rather than a bad one.
0.00 SBD,
0.00 STEEM,
0.51 SP
There are other potentially useful differences, too. It operates on a per-post basis, so could be used with more granularity, and it could potentially help to normalize the downvote in the ecosystem. Along with that, maybe "downvote" could be renamed to something like "deboost" or "downrank".
But, yeah, I don't know if the potential for retaliation is surmountable. It's an interesting idea, but hard to guess how it would play out in the real world.
0.00 SBD,
0.02 STEEM,
0.02 SP