RE: Downvotes Oh Noes!
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I am sorry for not being more elaborate.
It is not about you, it is about the people or accounts you vote. The problem from my, and our hive community members, point of view is dual.
Sometimes, due to auto-vote, some account can get substantial amount of rewards consistently. This is not content creators fault per say. As they didn't set up auto-vote or stike a deal (although in the past that has happened) But if they want they CAN do something about it. They can post less frequently (as many veteran hivers do). Or they CAN decline rewards (just like edicted did on his latest post, Kudos to @edicted !)
Second, the curator, you, can address the problem as well. You can potentially skip certain content creator manually even if their content seem to fit your criteria, or vote them less than you thought you might, just to adjust for normalization.
That is good curation. Spreading the rewards far and wide, even if it doesn't match your criteria 100%. Again this is not about my world or political view or yours. I am a very practical and factual person. I view it flatly from the reward or 'money' point of view. My goal is to normalize the rewards as much as practical.
I see. I am interested to understand your motivation and rationale for aiming to limit the capacity for curators to reward the content they prefer, in favor of a kind of averaging effect where all creators receive a standardized (or 'normalized') payout. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your goals here.
If all curators based their voting not on the content of the posts, but instead aimed to reward content creators who were not receiving any upvotes, wouldn't we completely break the essence of Hive - proof of brain? Wouldn't that completely negate the motivational mechanisms that Steem/Hive are based on? Wouldn't we also inspire people to simply create multiple accounts that churn out valueless content in order to receive upvotes?
there is a big gap between 'valueless content' and 'highly over-rewarded content'. There is a middle class. This middle class is what most of the curators are missing. Look around, and you will see them.
I am here for a long time. I know what hive is, please believe me. I call this my home. You are welcome, and thank you. That is all the time I have today.
PS.
We are handling 'valueless content' far better than 'highly over-rewarded' content, thanks to multiple anti-abuse projects. Like Hivewatchers, and Hive-DR and several other individuals are accounts who have downvoted some of these posts.
Total amount of downvote issued is insignificant compared to total amount of upvote issued on hive. This is a verifiable fact. Anyone can check it. Yet, multiple people have written posts about 'abuse of DV' however, I am yet to see a post of 'abuse of upvote' in any recent memory. You guys talk about 'alternatives'. Don't you find it funny?
OK, there is a lot to digest here, but we greatly appreciate the interaction and explanation from your point of view. We're so focused on the content that apparently we haven't accounted for the other elements (mostly) beyond our control. I'll discuss with the crew here and try to get a better handle on how to proceed. I'll just say that from our perspective, we have been greatly defunded by Google, et al. so naturally we are seeking revenue, but if we can do this in a better way for the HIVE community, then we'll aim for that. Much appreciated!