RE: Is There a Fix For Hive's Downvote Problems?
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
!lol
https://hivealive.io/untrending
You can see from marky's numbers above that freebornsociety is a good resource to follow along with for who is flagging what.
The different weights are different flaggers.
This discord is the second antiabuse initiative in the hive: https://discord.gg/sR7gBWfZb, many of the curators are there.
There isn't a widespread downvote problem in the hive, there is an entitled to rewards issue, though.
IF you don't believe me, follow along and find out for yourself.
I had to, and the years since have proven marky correct.
lolztoken.com
But it folded.
Credit: reddit
@allentaylor, I sent you an $LOLZ on behalf of antisocialist
(1/4)
NEW: Join LOLZ's Daily Earn and Burn Contest and win $LOLZ
Any time something of value is at stake, there will be corruption. People will feel entitled. What strikes me as funny is that both sides of this debate point the finger at the other side as the entitled. Both are correct.
Please show me these corrupted downvoters. I'd also love to know how they make money off their downvotes.
Downvotes are not necessarily about making money. It's very often about preventing someone else from making money, or making "too much" money. Like, how much is too much?
All of this voting is subjective. What would be interesting is to conduct a study on upvotes and downvotes. Why do we do it? Why does Subject A upvote Subject B? Why does Subject C downvote Subject D? In either case, there is an incentive or a disincentive at play. The blockchain has given rise to more than one short-form content frontend because of the debate over whether short-form content can provide value. Most of us would agree that it can, but there are some people who would prefer that Hive remain a long-form content medium. Some of those folks have downvoted short-form content just for being short-form content.
I've got nothing against the downvote button, but there are people who clearly feel the need to use it to somehow correct a perceived injustice for every individual who receives "too many" upvotes or is about to receive an abundance of rewards for an introductory post. Flagging spam and plagiarism are a given, but hitting everything that appears to be low-value content might mean misjudging some of them.
Downvotes are a balance to upvotes, a lot of content here is grossly over-rewarded and a lot is grossly under rewarded in comparison. The system was designed for the community to vote with both upvotes and downvotes to establish what the community feels is a fair amount.
Most people will immediately flip out if there is a downvote regardless the amount or reason.
Prior to me getting involved, there were multiple 100% automated posts making $100+/day. Do you feel that is fair to authors who put hours into writing their own content and make less than $1?
I 100% agree there are bad downvotes, but it is extremely rare and far less common than bad upvotes. I don't feel it is even remotely a epedemic. It's a problem, but extremely rare and 100% fixable with the tools already available to us.
Not all downvotes you feel are bad are actually bad downvotes, in most cases you either don't know why they are happening, or don't want to accept it.
As the largest downvoter on the platform, I don't go around downvoting people because I don't like them or disagree with them. I can't speak for everyone, but the reality is most people here have no significant stake so their downvotes are virtually meaningless.
I feel entitlement is far more of a epedemic here than these rogue downvotes you can't produce.
I don't know if it's "most" people, but a lot of people do, and I think the reason is because they value their own content more than everyone else does. Instead of seeing it as an object lesson, they see it as an injustice. Human nature, I guess.
Life isn't fair. If this happens as a consequence of this:
then the community has spoken, but keep in mind that "the community" consists of whales who can upvote or downvote at 10% percent with a strength greater than a dozen plankton with an upvote or downvote of 100%. To some people, that can seem like an imbalance. I certainly believe that those who have built their reputations on the chain should have more clout. But with greater clout comes greater responsibility.
We found something to agree on.
No one knows why anyone else is downvoting unless they ask, or the downvoter discloses it. When I downvote, which is not often, I do usually leave a comment explaining why. The exception is when something is blatantly spam or plagiarized. I've actually seen people bragging about downvoting something they thought was low-value and I do think there is a huge grey area where "low-value" content can mean a lot of things that are relative to each other. Maybe someone's English isn't that great, so their prose seems choppy and broken. Maybe they aren't great at expressing themselves in written form but have interesting ideas. "Low-value" is a relative term that can mean different things to different people.
Entitlement is a big problem for the human face in general. Especially in the U.S.
Nobody asks their upvoters why they upvoted.
Few want to suffer what comes with downvoting, even 'correctly'.
It's not rocket surgery, original content, every time.
People doing that don't get flagged, very often.
Thanks for the HiveAlive link. Just what I asked @themarkymark for and didn't get. I've removed my witness vote from him and given it to @ura-soul instead. That's a very useful resource.
Ura had a downvote problem for a long time, too.
Thanks, I appreciate it. Unfortunately, some of the other top 20 witnesses even ridiculed me building the downvote table!
I will be rebuilding that entire website soon and improving it quite a bit, just need more spare time.
I personally have no problems with the downvote table, more information is a not a bad thing, the crying about downvotes in every single channel on every platform was what I found annoying, but I ignored most of it. Everywhere I went, it was you ranting about downvotes for quite a while.
I wasn't actually referring to you with this comment. A couple of others seemed a bit nervous and leapt into attack mode.
I know, but downvotes are constantly complained about, but it is rarely a real issue, and the community has the tools to easily counter them. Upvotes are far more poorly used by a factor of 10,000x.
You have no way to know the lost growth that has occurred due to public perception of the presence of misplaced downvotes. I feel I have a better perspective on that because I am aware of the people making the comments and their reach. I feel that you can't be hearing them or you wouldn't be taking the position that you are taking here - assuming that you want Hive to grow.
I'm sure you do.
I am probably the most downvoted person here, I also give out the most downvotes. I can't even post right now because I am downvoted for $60 on every post and I can't curate because whoever I upvote gets downvoted. Yet I still support downvotes.
I think your logic suggests that you don't have a burning desire to post and to be read on Hive, otherwise you would just try to rebalance your relationship with the community to stop the downvotes you receive.. Plus would feel the frustration of not being able to post and would be more likely to view the situation as a form of censorship.
A network that offers 'uncensored' posting has a powerful selling point in the wider world, but not if perception of it is negative for other (and related) reasons.
The people who most want to be heard and who are censored a lot are going to do what they can to go where they aren't censored. If they get 'demonetised' in any way (including through excessive downvoting) they will tend to label it as censorship. I personally agree with them because I can't logically view the situation in any other way without denying something.
LOL, it's one party who is mad that the abuser he was upvoting got downvoted. It has nothing to do with the community. You can read about it here if you care, but it's just nonsense and I just don't give a shit anymore I got better things to do with my time. It's what comes with dealing with abuse, and it is one of the rare cases downvotes are used maliciously. For everyone else, it's extremely rare and not even remotely a large scale problem. You seem to have recovered just fine with your $100+ posts, yet you were going everywhere anyone would listen to you screaming bloody murder about downvotes.
During the Steemit.com days, there was a general agreement to only use downvotes to combat blatant spam and abuses that the community generally agreed on. It worked reasonably well as I recall.. Then things got 'organised' by way of 'enforcers' taking on the job of network cops. No-one really asked for it, but they bravely stepped up anyway.
I don't know exactly what is motivating the continuing downvotes against you, but I presume that it is possible for you to do or say something that would change the situation. If I had to guess I would say it's likely that the downvotes continue because of your unchanging opinions on the topic. As far as I can tell, you make enough money from being in the top 20 witness spot that you aren't really bothered about some author rewards or the downvotes involved.
I took a long break from posting here and put my energy elsewhere instead of helping to directly grow Hive. I guarantee that there are many people who would have put their own time into marketing and growing Hive, who didn't, specifically because of the lack of restraint on Hive with downvoting and the top-down attempt to control the network for 'safety' that didn't exist so much on Steem. It's sad that we had to leave Steem due to top-down control and yet the first thing certain people did when creating Hive is to add a bit of that in themselves. I don't personally think it has helped and those who mock the 'anarcho' aspect of the design behind Steem and Hive are clueless as to what makes it work, why Steem was the once number 2/3 chain in the world and why Hive will never get anywhere near that as long as their behaviour continues.
Again, I'm not really talking about you with this later comments - but you do seem to share the view that none of this is a problem.
I was there on Steemit in those days when certain people decided they had to protect the rewards pool and went on downvoting sprees to do just that. And then there were the downvote wars. Entire groups of people attacking other groups with downvotes just to prove a point. Was it widespread? Probably not. But it was ridiculous watching it happen.
I do recall that too, yes, but the overall 'guidelines' for what was 'fair game' for downvotes was far more open at that time. That being said, yes, ultimately anyone could downvote anything in any way and face the consequences.
That doesn't fit the agenda in their head, and they don't want to hear it.
I see that, too.
Too bad they still had to read it.
Maybe their illusion will shatter.
Nah, people are incapable of changing their minds.
Alot of them, for sure.
There are techniques, though.