Distributing Steem toward and away from content

in steem •  6 months ago 

Over the last few months, Pal, Leo, Neoxag, Sports, Creativecoin and all of the other tokens have been introduced as layers upon the Steem blockchain and have had quite a profound effect on the Steem economy.

With the introduction of the themed and tokenized frontends, more people are not only tailoring their content to suit, they are thinking about the way the token stake works with many separating their token stake away from their Steem stake and this change has also brought with it more people considering the content they vote on and what adds value to their preferred front ends.

Something changes, everything changes

The changes in the token range has raised the people interested in understanding the way the economics on Steem works and I have noticed more people delving deeper into how things operate here. I believe this is going to continue with the introduction of the 2.5 downvotes because what people essentially have access to is another staked token that directs the inflation pool.

While an upvote directs it toward content, a downvote directs it away and since it is all stake-weighted, everyone on the platform will have access to 25% more distributive power relative to the stake they have in SP.

We are all maximizers of some kind in this world as we are all trying to make the best of our experience, even though some people are much better at using their resources than others. What this means is that if we continue along the same vein, to not use the downvotes would essentially be wasting potential value and losing tokens.

In a perfect Steem world of downvotes, everyone would use their quota each day and redirect 25% of the distributed votes away from what doesn't add value onto what does. This is of course subjective but there is likely a fair bit of content that shouldn't be rewarded and a fair bit that should.

If we could as a community direct 25% away from content we as individuals believe shouldn't be rewarded onto content that we believe should, that would essentially split the 100% available for reward between 75% of users. Remember that the downvote directs it away to the pool and not towards, which means the upvotes would have more distributive power and the content that we as a community of individuals think deserve an upvote, will get more distribution added to them.

Those who distribute their upvotes poorly on content the rest of the community thinks doesn't deserve the value, will give up their power to distribute toward content because the rest of the community direct it away again and back into the pool. This means that the votes that are directed toward content that the individuals of the community believe hold value are even more distributive. So, not only will the pool have more in it, those who upvote poorly will essentially give up their vested rights to distribute by wasting it on content where it will be taken away from again.

While it is impossible to accurately predict, I think that if the Steem community did use the downvotes well, some kind of equilibrium would be achieved where content that holds value gets more heavily voted and, slowly the poorer content that was getting voted shifts its focus as people are maximizers.

No matter the code, people will always find new and inventive ways to maximize their experiences, but along that road it would be great if the most valuable thing one could do on Steem was to create for or support creations that add value to the ecosystem - whatever that means. What we do know is that the current situation isn't great and isn't overly attractive to people used to working on centralized platforms.

There are likely going to be a great deal of new options that will arise and I predict that there will be a token issued on SMT or SCOT that will track downvote usage and perhaps even reward the behavior. I also think that there will be quite a few people who will use their DVs via some kind of proxy, as they will not want to downvote directly. But, no matter what happens, I believe that the changes in the way distribution is organized will force many people into a reevaluation of the way they behave and as a result, eyes on the way others behave too.

The downvote pool adds another layer to the Steem experience that brings a lot of game into the mix. It increases randomization of outcome as well as incentivizes better behaviors on Steem without centralizing the policing of the network - it really becomes up to us to create the kinds of experience we would like. This gamification adds in more metrics to look at and evaluate the health of ones account.

Is the healthy account one who only distributes, or one who also redistributes?

What it comes down to perhaps is what the individual considers suitable behavior for themselves. For example, someone could downvote my post because they disagree with what I say and think it doesn't deserve the reward their stake can direct away - and they are entitled to do so. If they think that is suitable behavior for themselves, they will do it without batting an eyelid.

Most people however are unlikely to downvote unless there is actual abuse present, and that can be for the usuals like plagiarism or, disagreement of reward - like those who buy huge votes on crap. Who knows, perhaps some of the largest abusers on the platform will get a few "set-and-forget" auto-redistribution followers.

As I opened with, a lot of people worry about their token voting power for the tribes so split their accounts to better distribute and earn. I am hoping that people will be watching their Steem downvote mana in the same way and recognizing that when it isn't used on the spam, scam and shite - it is costing value to themselves and the people on this platform who are honestly trying to contribute to the community and build a better ecosystem.

And while there is the value to consider in the pool, there is also the much greater value of the entire ecosystem to consider. At the moment, I think we can do better than we are and, no one gets healthy quickly after such a long and crushing illness.

Something changes, everything changes - things are changing.

Taraz
[ a Steem original ]

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Hmm, a downvote token?

'Shit i've not earned my downvote token let me head over to trending'

I heard someone say, in the future.

...if we continue along the same vein, to not use the downvotes would essentially be wasting potential value and losing tokens.

Not sure how many people view it this way, yet.

Not sure how many people view it this way, yet.

yep, it will be a stretch of the imagination for many but if you consider that there are people here investing and, people here scamming for extraction - perhaps the investors might want to shore up some of the holes.

  ·  6 months ago Reveal Comment

Hmm, a downvote token?

Perhaps someone will issue one based on the vested weight of the DV and back them with upvotes as well. 50/50 curation might make it worth it.

yeah create a downvote token so the selfish self-serving gits on the platform can earn them by indiscriminately downvoting content they have never read to earn tokens they don't deserve.
what could possible go wrong?


Learn more about SHADE here

Join the fun promoting your post at Pimp Your Post Thursday. Win SHADE or SBI, make friends. Every Thursday in The Ramble

When you give everyone a "Free" something you give no one a "Free" something.

Those who were concerned about content still are.

Those who would have passively accepted downvotes still will.

Those who fight back aggressively also still have the exact same ratio.

:) It amuses me.

It amuses me too and you are right. I guess the hope is that people who care about something will more actively care about it. Some might even come back and care to be part of the experiment - just in case it does something.

The thing is that you can't do anything about a toddler with five million SP distributed across various voting accounts. A disordered person like that will shit all over the platform no matter what. People like that will get their 2.5 downvotes, too. What we need is a van Helsing account that has 10 million SP that can shut down practically any abuser here. Such an account would be funded by the middle class and a Steemit, Inc delegation alone. Who it would be controlled by would not be as important as being under constant and close scrutiny. I would gladly delegate 10% of my SP to an initiative like that.

They have created Helsing-esque accounts on the tribes and it seems that they have used some of the ideas of the original ;D Doing it on Steem is harder because of the decentralized nature but, perhaps possible at some point.

Steem is also bigger. What the anti-abuse accounts on Steem have done is go after the relatively small players. What we need is an account in possession of 5-10 million SP and that does not shy away from going after anyone.

This is why the idea was to have the top 200 holders opt into it with a percent or two, as it would create a monster that can take out any of them as individuals which puts in some self-checks. The idea is solid.

I like that idea. There would be some complications and the question of abusing the power still... It's definitely something to look into more.

Posted using Partiko Android

Yes, this is it.

Good the have an archive of what was written in the past. 😄.

I always wonder what it will look like in 20 years time :)

  ·  6 months ago Reveal Comment

much sense in this write-up, we all have equal rights in what to be or not on this platform. the issue of downvote and upvote should be accredited duly to user discretion. though I do understand and reason along with you that there should be a kind of check and balance in users' activities on steemit. The primary aims of many users with a high stake is to make a fortune which is why there is a lot of shit post or underrated piece at the top. I think it is high time we changed our mindset and face reality.

. The primary aims of many users with a high stake is to make a fortune which is why there is a lot of shit post or underrated piece at the top.

This is the primary reason for the people who have nothing too. have a look at the small accounts that are curating those over-inflated paid for posts.

At the end of the day, people do as they do - even if it hurts themselves later.

I've only down voted one post before, preferring to just not up vote bad material. But lately, there's so much empty stuff on Steemit that I've been considering it.

Posted using Partiko Android

The idea of Steem is a decentralized community which means, the governance and the policing is up to us.

I am most excited about looking at it all through a new lens as it will be like learning it all over again! Maybe I can finally learn to downvote more often?

I think you will learn well enough and if a lot of people take part, it becomes so common the emotional aspect is taken out of it on both sides.

For example, someone could downvote my post because they disagree with what I say and think it doesn't deserve the reward their stake can direct away - and they are entitled to do so.

I don't get the first part. I mean... I see that happen a lot. Downvotes because of disagreement with the opinion of the author. What happened to freedom of speech?

In a perfect Steem world of downvotes, everyone would use their quota each day and redirect 25% of the distributed votes away from what doesn't add value onto what does. This is of course subjective...

It is subjective, alright. And that does bother me more than just a bit.

Tbh, I have 0% trust in the fact that people will be using their free downvotes for battling abuse. I'm with @buggedout on this one... I'm very afraid it is going to turn out to be very ugly. Like this place isn't the Wild west already...

What happened to freedom of speech?

No one has lost their freedom of speech with downvotes, just their potential to earn on what they say.

I'm very afraid it is going to turn out to be very ugly. Like this place isn't the Wild west already...

It could be very ugly. Tells something of the community then doesn't it? This little experiment is about working out better ways to govern ourselves as well as build a decentralized economy that empowers participants to potentially earn. This doesn't mean earn on anything that is offered though because there is still a supply and demand factor involved. The more people who hold, the better it becomes.

I think there is a chance that if a few larger community accounts take part, more will follow. It is a community effort though.

No one has lost their freedom of speech with downvotes, just their potential to earn on what they say.

I agree on downvoting because you don't agree with the rewards a post gets. But not because you disagree with an opinion. (I see that happen regularly, though.) Imo, this will lead to even more fear to say anything that is not in line with how to big stakeholders think. it's bad enough as it is already.

It could be very ugly. Tells something of the community then doesn't it?

Of course it does. I saw a comment by you yesterday that mentioned that 'the rest of the community' should act responsibly. I honestly don't know how big that 'rest of the community' is... I don't think it's very big.

People tell me I'm a pessimist. I rather think of myself as a realist, lol. I hope you're right and it turns out fine, but I don't have a lot of trust in people when it comes to taking responsibility for their actions and governing themselves and each other. Guess we'll see how it turns out soon enough

I don't have a lot of trust in people taking responsibility for themselves either, that is why we have the world we currently have. The hope is that each round, a few more people wake the hell up.

The hope is that each round, a few more people wake the hell up.

Plenty of rounds to go to have enough who are awake, I'm afraid. Let's hope it's not too late by then...

Probably will be too late, but not starting means never having a chance.

Can't argue with that! :0)

Congratulations! This post has been manually curated by @leocurator and will be showcased in the LEO Curator Daily curation feature post. "The LEO Curator blog intends to compile all top curated #steemleo posts for the convenience of other LEO users in search for time worthy posts."

Thanks :)

I can see myself proxying my down vote out. I think that would be a good option for smaller accounts like mine, less chance of a retaliation down vote, and the simple fact I just ignore the stuff I think of as garbage, like they say, one man's trash is another man's treasure.

I think this should be possible and a good option for those who are worried about retaliation. With enough smaller accounts, the proxy could be a very strong deterrent.


This post is manually curated by @azizbd and received an upvote from @SchoolForSDG4
School For SDG4
A School For Social and Educational Development of Underprivileged Children

Congratulations @tarazkp! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You received more than 330000 upvotes. Your next target is to reach 340000 upvotes.

You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!

You got a 54.14% upvote from @ocdb courtesy of @tarazkp! :)

@ocdb is a non-profit bidbot for whitelisted Steemians, current max bid is 20 SBD and the equivalent amount in STEEM.
Check our website https://thegoodwhales.io/ for the whitelist, queue and delegation info. Join our Discord channel for more information.

If you like what @ocd does, consider voting for ocd-witness through SteemConnect or on the Steemit Witnesses page. :)