You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: SteemWorld Update / New Tool Available / Abuse Finder
The abusers list already changed hugely in the last few days (total payouts were much higher in some cases), because there are already a few whales like @bullionstackers, @steemzzang, @donekim, @virus707, @cjsdns, @photoholic, @steem-agora and more working hard on decreasing the abusers payouts with downvotes.
People who don't like downvotes must know that their own payouts will automatically go up when the abusers payouts go down, because that's how Steem's rewardpool works.
Together we will make it ;)
Exactly! I always try to explain that ...
@jaki01 @steemchiller
I am agree 100% with this things. But I don't agree the concept of free downvotes or say there should not be different voting power for upvote and downvote. The voting power should be same, wherever you want use it, if you like use as upvote or downvote. Not agree with individual voting power concept, which is currently running in our system.
We already agreed to disagree concerning that. And that's fine. I won't downvote you (or anybody else) for disagreement on opinion. :-)
I repeat my point of view for the other readers: if downvotes 'cost' too much, people will ask themselves "Why should I pay to downvote spam/plagiarism/farming while others are busy earning money?" :)
Yes, we both understand the things.
First things is, No one is paying for downvotes in both condition. It is that not earning, which they can earn.
If we have given power to others without their some loss, they will use that power in wrong things also. If they have to fear of loose something then they care about the power, when they use it. They use it when necessary (no other way is there).
That is difference in free and having some charge. Free things they use without concern about that.
Unfortunatelly @mehta - the end result would be that hardly anyone would downvote any content. That's simple as that.
@crypto.piotr
That is not possible because i received many downvotes at the time when no free downvotes are there. And many more downvoting accounts are their like steemcleaner etc at that time.
If committee will be their to take care of flag complaint, it will worked where actually it require.
Why should I flag a plagiarist spending my own voting power while for example you use your voting power to earn curation reward?
Look, nobody would do anything against abuse in this scenario (which we had before on STEEM).
Your concern is that aggressive whales may flag more if flags are 'free'. Therefore I suggested the implementation of an elected committee to counter abusive flags.
I like the your post regarding downvote link given in above comment.
But i again say that you can think it other way. Make a committee of respected users elected by community and equipped with sufficient SP to flag the post those are abusing (milking/farming purposes) the system. Not for as you mentioned.
Keep the one voting power for upvote/downvote and if any steemians feels that someone is abusing the system then inform to committee and committee analysis and take decision and according to decision they can downvote that user posts/comments.
Think it other way. Why everyone downvote, when we can have a committee for it.
In your suggestion first everyone downvotes others and then committee will correct. It means first we do wrong thing then we correct.
In my suggestion in first time we do correct thing.
If we had that committee, then many different options would be available. I am open for discussion.
The question is, if that committee alone would be eneough to curb all kinds of abuses. I like for example the idea to flag obvious plagiators (which I recently did in my insect community) instead of getting in contact with a committee, tell them there is a plagiator and cause them additional work.
It is more easy and pragmatic to flag myself, and then people can still complain about me if I abuse my downvotes (the plagiator won't complain and cause additional work, because he knows himself that he is a plagiator ...).
I think to further reduce workload of the committee downvotes of users who misuse flags could permanently and automatically be countered by committee upvotes.
One of the main tasks of the committee could be to solve the 'hard cases' of accounts which are too big to handle for the average user.
But I agree, there is enough food for further thoughts and discussions.
The committee will not find whom to downvote. The committee will review the request for downvote given by any steemians, that's it. Like they will do, as your suggestion (after the downvote review). Work will same. Do the things right in one shot, not in second shot.
I hope we both understand the situation.
hi @jaki01
Very good point.
What would you say about an idea to build some blacklist and ensure that users who would end up on this blacklist wouldn't be able to upvote (their upvote wouldn't provide any rewards and it's value would be zero).
That would obviously have to be programmed by STINC, who would have to adjust their API.
Yours, Piotr
I think I would prefer to counter upvotes respectively flags of these accounts automatically to neutralize them.
Then no intervention on blockchain level would be necessary, and the decision could be easily reversed again.
hi @mehta
What would you say about an idea to build some blacklist and ensure that users who would end up on this blacklist wouldn't be able to upvote (their upvote wouldn't provide any rewards and it's value would be zero).
That would obviously have to be programmed by STINC, who would have to adjust their API.
Yours, Piotr
Hello @crypto.piotr
Where i said this? I don't want any blacklist and also don't want to upvote value zero for that type of account. I never says that. I don't understand from where you conclude this.
I just say that voting power should be same for upvote/downvote, No different voting power for upvote and downvote. It means no free downvotes, like we have earlier.
Sorry for such a late reply
I'm confused. I asked about your opinion on that idea. I didn't say that "you said it".
Yours, Piotr
Our team doesn't have enough SP, but we support it with Korean Witness.
The SP of Korea Community is not enough to solve all the abusing.
More people need to participate in Downvote or Steemit's help.
Many people are negative about Downvote. I don't think it's a good system either.
However, we need a replaceable system to remove Downvote.
I'm very perplexed about why the korean community would downvote at all. My impression was that the proxy.token was representative for a large portion of the Korean community and they pushed hard to eliminate downvoting. So I would have expected them to shun such an action.
Maybe I was mistaken and proxy.token doesn't represent as much of the Korean community as I thought. Or maybe they just changed their mind. Or maybe this bunch of witnesses is the same as the old bunch of witnesses. They seem to be doing the same things (freezing accounts, frequently trending posts, trying to help clean up the place, etc.). Only time will tell, but up to this point, history seems to be repeating itself.
There is a difference between real authors and people who just post senseless comments to upvote them and sell the rewards on external markets. Most people don't like to downvote normal content and I still believe that, once the current storms are over, we won't need free downvotes anymore.
Maybe we can create a community account for fighting abuse in future, which does not belong to one person/group and can only downvote based on fixed consensus rules. The majority of stakeholders would need to agree, before the account is able to start downvoting an author. Maybe an account that can not be powered down like the @steem.dao account. It could even be paid (directly powered up) by the SPS.
Dear @steemchiller
Well, in that case why wouldn't we convince STINC to allow to blacklist particular users from being able to receive curation rewards - also based on fixed consensus rules.
I think that would be the best solution. We cannot keep downvoting same people hoping that they will not get bored abusing the pool. We would end up getting bored and tired of it first.
Cheers, Piotr
Our team and several Witness keep thinking about how to solve this.
Our team agrees with the blacklist system and believes that a community voting system like SPS is needed.
Sorry for such a late reply. I only had a chance to read your comment a moment ago
Thx for your comment. I love to see how responsive you are :))
Downvote reduces rewards, which can be confusing if someone don't understand the system.
This is a negative factor in using Steemit.
Steemit is not just for those who understand blockchain. So our team thinks we need a different solution.
Here are some interesting thoughts on the topic by @remlaps:
https://steemit.com/hive-101145/@remlaps/re-steemchiller-q91w4e
As I wrote recently:
If interested you may read my post about the downvote topic.
thx for sharing, will check it out right away
hi @roadofrich, @moeknows
I agree with you. Perhaps you could check my comment to @jaki01 (I don't want to copy+paste it to many times) in this topic.
Yours, Piotr
Are those users organized and working together @steemchiller?