Rethinking Hive author rewards: How can we improve the distribution of rewards?
Disclaimer!
I'm going to mention a bunch of people in my blog. The people I mention have recently been involved in discussions that, in some way, relate to improving the distribution of rewards on Hive.
I’m mentioning these people this because I want to spark a discussion about this subject.
This unsolicited mention is a one-time thing.
I do appreciate it if you would like to join the discussion on this subject because I think together we can make this better!
If you know other hivers that aren't mentioned in this blog, but can contribute to the discussion, feel free to inform them. Reblogging this blog might also help.
I don't want the potential rewards of this post to get in the way of the discussion, so I decided to burn all rewards of this posts.
(I got the banner image from the #hive-assets channel in the Hive Discord)
What's wrong with the distribution of author rewards?
And now to the subject of this blog; How can we improve the distribution of author rewards?
But why would we want to improve the distribution of author rewards? I say we, but I have to relate this to myself. I think there are a couple of things that aren't going well right now.
I am of the opinion that there are quite some posts that are 'overrewarded'. Whether a blog is overrewarded is very subjective. My main argument is that some Hivers get rewards regardless of the content they post, where others Hivers that put a lot of effort in their posts, but hardly get any rewards at all. Comparing two posts is always Comparing apples and oranges, but the rewards just go wrong too often, I think.
I think there are many reasons for this which. I will sum up a couple of them below:
Autovotes
I think autovotes are bad for Hive. Luckily I hear from a lot of people that they vote manually, but I know there are a lot of people that are using the hive.vote service. And I'm no saint myself. I've used autovoting in the past to maximize my results too.
But with autovoting, a group of users automatically gets your vote. Autovoting is beneficial for both the author as the curator since they get rewards regardless of the content.
Yes, there surely are curators that regularly check the post of the people they vote on, but there are also certainly a lot that don't. In fact, I assume that there are quite some Hivers that aren't even active anymore on Hive and still have an autovote running.
Yes, it is nice to get autovotes (I'm receiving a few myself), but I don't think it's good for Hive.
Blind upvotes
I don't know if this is the correct terminology, but with blind upvotes I mean votes that are
casted without reading the blogs. I must admit that I do this too sometimes when my voting mana is close to 100% and I don't have a lot of time to curate. I then go to my following or communities feed and upvote some posts from Hivers that I know post quality content.
But blindly casting all your votes to the people you know isn't good for a fair distribution of rewards too.
If you are new to Hive, you haven't built up a network and probably won't get any blind votes. Or at least way less than the oldbies on Hive.
Explore algorithms
The algorithms also are not in favour of the new and/or smaller users. The trending page on Hive.blog, PeakD and Ecency show posts that already have a lot of rewards. By showcasing these you make it easier for people to vote on them.
There are alternative views in the font-ends like "hot". I don't exactly know how the posts are selected on that page, but the blogs Hive.blog shows in that view don't have very high rewards (yet), but they are from Hivers that regularly get high rewards.
Votes for delegations
The vote for delegations is something I recently learned from a post by @acidyo recently came up with. https://peakd.com/curation/@acidyo/hive-curation-are-things-starting-to-go-too-far
Some initiatives are voting posts of users that have delegated hive to their curation account. This way these users are assured of upvotes. They are actually buying their votes this way. If you delegate to a couple of these initiatives you can get quite nice post rewards even when the quality of the blogs isn't that high.
Possible solutions
Ok, I've come up with a couple of problems (at least I think it are problems), but are there any solutions to combat them?
I've been thinking quite a lot about it and it isn't easy. There have been multiple discussions about possible solutions and they all have their pros and cons.
I didn't came up with all these ideas, so I'm trying to give people that came up with it the credits where I can.
Combat autovoting
I think it would be wonderful if we could disable autovoting. This would mean that nobody would get votes automatically anymore and curators are forced to vote manual. And manual voting would surely result in a better distribution of rewards. I only think this is technically not possible (maybe one the Hive devs could confirm this).
And for the people that don't have time to curate; I'd suggest to delegate your stake to one or more curation services that do manually upvote for you.
Provide better feeds/filters
As I mentioned above; the explore pages of the different Hive front end (@peakd , @ecency, hive.blog ) are showing hot and high rewarded posts which which makes it easier for users to give these posts even more votes.
I think there should be a feed with posts of a couple of hours old, from a certain length that have low or no rewards at all. You could also weigh some other figures as reputation level (more about that later) and engagement (does this hiver engage a lot in comment sections).
Another option would be the possibility to apply filters instead of making a new feed. This way you could for instance filter out posts that have more than a certain amount of rewards.
This might be something for the developers of these frontends (@asgarth, @good-karma) to think about.
Rethink reputation
This is something I've been seeing more often recently. @meno made a blog about rethinking reputation on Hive.
Right now every Hive account has a reputation number, but this doesn't tell a thing. It's just a number that shows that the account received a lot of upvotes from users with a higher reputation level. The longer you are on Hive, the higher your number is. But it doesn't show you are a good hiver (whatever that may be).
In his blog, @nemo mentions a couple of other factors that are useful to indicate the trushworthyness like their upvoting habits, engagement, initiatives and staking/withdrawing habits.
In a comment on the post @blocktrades revealed that they are working on redesigning the reputation score, which is good to hear!
Krampus Co-efficient
The Krampus Co-efficient (KE) is also something I've seen in a couple of posts recently. The KE was introduced by @azircon and shows how much rewards you retracted from the Hive blockchain compared to how much you aerned in Author and Curation rewards (link).
KE > 1.0, you hold less than you earned
KE < 1.0, you hold more than you earned
This number shows if Hivers are extracting value from Hive.
If you believe in the Hive blockchain you might want to send your upvotes to the Hivers that don't withdraw much Hive from the blockchain because that could have a negative impact on the price of Hive.
On the other hand there are people that really need the money they earn on Hive to provide themselves with daily necessities.
As I discussed with @steveguereschi in the comments in his blog about this subject; a large stakeholder extracting 1000 Hive a month might not have the same negative impact on his or her KE as the extraction of 100 hive might have for a small user.
Although we have to be careful to punish people that need their Hive income to make a living, I also think it could help us determine the Hivers that use Hive as a cash cow and we should be made aware of that so we can stop upvoting these users.
Another blog that relates to this subject is one from @gungunkrishu who made a a blog where he listed the top 50 users that have withdrawn the most Hive in the past week.
It would be useful if these things could be taken into account in the reputation score.
The reward cap
This is an idea I came up with myself. I also don't know if it is possible to implement this (maybe a Hive dev could tell me), but I'll share it anyway.
It would be nice if we could set a maximum of rewards a post can receive by upvotes.
When a post reached its max rewards, It's locked and you can't vote on it anymore. You then have to choose other posts to vote on. I think this will cause a better distribution of rewards.
And if you think the author does deserve more rewards, you can send him/her a tip.
One of the issues with this idea (apart from whether it is technically possible) is that we as a community have to agree on the maximum reward of a post. And does it have to change with the value of the Hive token too?
To decide the maximum of the cap could be difficult since, as I mentioned earlier; value is a subjective matter.
I know that rewards back in the time of Steem were even crazier, but when I see blogs that receive $100 or even over $200 rewards, that is still a crazy amount for a bunch of words and pictures in a blog. Personally I would sugget to set it around $50 to remove the (to me) excessive rewards.
Downvotes
When it isn't possible to configure a reward cap, downvoting could be a solution.
With downvotes the overrewarded posts could be cut back in rewards.
@smooth is one of the Hivers that actively downvotes posts that he (assuming you are a he) finds overrewarded.
Downvotes are often discussed. Like recently during a Hive thrive podcast featuring @acidyo
Downvoting isn't very popular on Hive. People often see it as a personal attack, especially when the downvoter doesn't explain why he/she downvotes the post. It is sometimes seen as stealing of rewards, which is actually not true because until the 7th day, you don't have any rewards at all.
Aside from that, you really are sticking your head above the parapet. Downvoting users may result in retalliation, and could result in people downvoting all your posts.
And finally; downvoting a post with a very high amount of rewards is hard to combat for users with a small stake.
A solution to this might be that existing curation services will use their hive power to reduce rewards on posts. They have the stake and won't get hurt too much by retalliation actions. But this does result in extra work for those services without any benefit for them.
We have to be aware too that the increase of downvotes also increases the risk of downvote wars.
Orca's unite!
A reply on one of my comments by @alex-rourke has got me thinking as well.
We often look at the whales on Hive because they have the most power, but there are even more orca's on Hive. Together they might could have the same or even more impact as the whales when they work together.
In his Fellow Orca's Unite blog he recently published, he stated that Orca's should take their responibility. One of the thinks that Orca's should look out for according to Alex is content that is undermining the ecosystem.
I think he has a really good point there
Let's create a think tank!
As you might have noticed in this blog, a lot of people care about Hive. Some of them have come up with ideas for improvement, but somehow these idea's never really take off.
I've been following quite some Hive podcasts lately where there are also good discussions about improvement.
If we really want to make Hive a better place, we really need to turn some of these ideas into actions.
Maybe we could set up a think tank with users that are interested in this,
so we could work out some of the ideas I mention in this blog or even brainstorm about some other ideas for improvement.
I don't know in what form this think tank should be. For the ease of communication we could use Discord for this.
If you managed to reach this part of my longest blog ever, you are probably interested in this subject 😀
If so, please let me know if you are interested in joining a think tank about this in the comments.
Some final words
This blog is a collection of information I've gathered throughout the past months supplemented with my own ideas.
I think it is important that people that really add value to Hive should be rewarded for that, independent of how long they have been around on this blockchain or how many friends they have made!
This doesn't necessarily need to be by blogging, but people could also have other initiatives.
Onboarding is a hot topic on Hive too, but I think onboarding is useless if we don't look at the retention of new users.
Money should not be a motive to stay on Hive, but unequal treatment could be a huge turnoff for new users.
There are quite a lot of things that could be improved, but I believe that when people that have the best interest for Hive work together, we could really make a change!
It would be nice to hear your ideas about the points I addressed in this blog or maybe some other ideas as well.
Feel free to tag other users that you might think could be interested in this subject.
And a reblog to make this blog more visible would be appreciated.
Now let's have some good discussions in the comments!
Topcomment
Topcomment is an initiative to reward high quality comments.
Hive Photographers
For all Hive Photographers: come join our Hive Photographer Discord Channel
A weekly blog with an overview of all the photography contests on Hive. #photocontests.
Share anything about cycling in the Cycling Community,
Good post for discussions.
More tools from the front-ends would be beneficial, things like the KE thing (although I personally don't find it too valuable) it's important to exist and be shown and let curators and stakeholders make their own decisions, hopefully not solely based on that but a mixture of other things.
Tools like how many unique recipients of an account's votes, this can easily be turned into a number like KE as well.
The cap is also not a great idea IMO, but I'd have nothing against downvotes occurring for certain accounts earning too much or based on the indicators mentioned above or other things like what value those accounts provide and perceived intentions (if they constantly only post for the rewards it'd make sense to downvote them a bit more often if they're earning a lot).
A lot of these are great things to talk about and come up with ways to make it fairer for everyone on chain, but for now active and blatant vote selling seems like a much bigger issue IMO and it's important not to let that grow.
I'd also vote for front-ends to split up the comment section into known bot comments compared to regular genuine comments, this could also become a tool indicating how many genuine comments an account receives so curators aren't fooled by a quick glance making an account look "healthy" and deserving of rewards but looking into the posts you find out it's all just bots.
Good point!
I agree. But it would be best if the tools were integrated into the front ends, so users don't have to look up these 'values' for every post.
I was thinking of a sort of traffic light system just as they do in the UK to indicate how much fat/salt/sugar there is in food.
Replacing the rep score next to the username with some small icons that would visually indicate some behavior of the poster maybe could be an option.
I wonder why...?
Me neither, but who is going to do that? And how are you going to prevent downvote wars?
I see it as a whole; people not adding (or rather retracting) value from the Hive blockchain. I think you have really showed us an important thing, but you're doing it on your own now.
I think these problems could be improved when we, the willing Hivers, work together.
It encourages daily posts and discourages long high effort posts, some authors may not wanna post daily and maybe come out with something once a week/month where it's longer than most posts on trending that day, why limit it to a certain threshold of how much they can earn for it, especially with no evergreen hive rewards. I don't think we should discourage such posts from time to time.
Downvotes are always here to moderate any payout before the post is actually paid out - as you mentioned, I get downvoted with say $80+ posts, and I don't really mind, although I always do my best.
Every single one of us is responsible for their voting power, and the votes/rewards spread kind of define the future of the network. If everyone voted selfish, and with short term mindset, the price would go under.
I prefer supporting people who give back, and don't really milk the system - i.e. those who don't withdraw every penny they earn, and for that, KE ratio is quite fine. You can argue that if a whale and a minnow withdraw the same money, the latter would have terrible ratio. On the other hand, the whale had to earn, or perhaps buy their stake in the first place, the money did not come out of nowhere. The minnow who sells more or less everything can never reach the position to be able to sell "safe".
I think we should start minding this to be honest. While the intent is to distribute the reward pool a bit more and it makes sense, it also tends to ignore the general performance of whoever received the upvotes. Some people may put in a ton of effort into a post and they get next to nothing, then on one lucky day get $70 only to have that post downvoted. But then there'll be other people that post daily and get constant whale support around $30 that end up being ignored. It's a bit of a broken system.
KE also is fundamentally broken, but because it assumes people are paying attention to begin with. There are curators of big initiatives that hold less Hive than I do with a KE that's double (there's one that has a KE of almost 32 and making $250+ per month excluding the beneficiaries and tips they receive, and almost daily sends Hive to an exchange). Yet the people that end up being targeted for being extractors tend to have significantly lower KE ratios than the people that get daily appreciator upvotes.
Take a quick glance at this other person (not part of any curation efforts) who seems to do incredibly well on here despite almost never curating others and remains in a constant power down. KE almost at 20 (current HP held is 1.7k), but the upvotes continue to flow in.
The whole KE thing also doesn't really take into consideration that people shouldn't be expected to hold the vast majority of their earnings. In the long term an aggressive stance on KE would only limit the certain types of content that ends up here. Like people on YouTube may use their earnings to fund better equipment: improved lighting, better cameras/lenses etc. In that instance, someone with a poor KE but improving their video quality setup for making videos at home is more justified than someone with a poor KE that is posting phone pictures of fancy cafes every day.
KE ratio is just a number, pretty much like reputation as we have it. It's upon everabody to take it into consideration or not when curating.
Withdrawing rewards actually create that "whale dependency" - you can see people publishing either $1, or $15 posts, and nothing in between - the latter because of a whale upvote, since the community they publish in, or their audience does not have enough stake to push them higher - and that's not really decentralized or healthy to me. We need more "middle class" dolphins and orcas to curate content the way they will.
I have no clue who's behind Appreciator, I only got upvoted by them a few times.
The whale dependency has been a problem for years at this point, but I do think it has grown increasingly worse as of late. Many communities, big and small, would simply collapse without it. In smaller communities the argument of less interest being present due to niche subjects is valid, but the bigger communities relying on them does show a problem.
OCD has a generally decent idea towards who gets upvoted and how often: two times a week is the max and there was (at least when I was contributing) a look into whether people were considered over-rewarded and held their HP or not. The dependence is still very much there though within the communities under their incubation.
Appreciator is definitely a problem because they're clearly throwing daily votes at a group of people that barely hold more than 800 HP but are making 1k Hive a month from those votes. There's definitely no regard for the posting and curation habits of the person getting those votes.
No idea what the solution is here. Tighten things up too much and people leave, don't tighten things up enough and the dependency continues/worsens.
It would help to show this middle class more posts that have low rewards.
Dolphins and Orcas should already know where to look for them ;)
It's not the fact that they don't know where to look, but you really have to look for them. Where I can find all highly rewarded posts in the hot or trending feeds.
Well, I look for them in communities I care about, since I am hardly going to curate someone praising Nescafé in the Coffee community :)
That's a way. But I think it would help if there would be a stream with long blogs, of the subjects you like, thay have just a few upvotes after a few hours.
Just make it easier to find posts that deserve more upvotes.
There's certainly a problem that many communities are quite niche and a lot of posts end up going unseen in both engagement and rewards. OCD has a channel for finding such posts but it's still not enough, again we still have that reliance on whales there.
I see this more that Hive is still massively in its infancy, people have their preferences and the things we'd consider niche here just don't get the same attention as something finance/photography/travel related would. For example I am pretty much the only person on Hive posting about comics frequently. There are a few others that do it a bit less often, but it's like five of us in total spread across different communities. They get next to no engagement due to how niche it is here, and would make next to nothing both because of that and because Hive Book Club (where I post) is also an incredibly small community.
Part of my own goal with growing my HP is that I want to start being one of those people that does find and curate such people. I see a problem and want to do my part to fix it. Whether the subjects directly interest me or not.
I'm here for almost five years and never had a blog with $80+ rewards, not even above $50 if I remember 😂
The most successful travel posts of mine got even over $100, but that depends mainly on the current price. Here's a post from this Sunday for inspiration, one of these downvoted for excessive payout: https://ecency.com/hive-184437/@godfish/the-travelers-guide-to-getting-around-in-brazil-87m
I even have this badge for one of such posts:
Congrats! Travel blogs and music videos often do well.
Thanks :) Mine often have 1000+ words in two languages and no machine translation, so I believe they are kinda deserved :)
Although I'm not doubting the quality of your blog because I can see you really spend time creating yours. But when I compare it with other high quality blog of the same length that get 1/10 th of the rewards it seems a bit unfair. And not because you get this reward this time, but there are more hivers that get those rewards frequently.
Wouldn't you be happy when your blog would have received a bit less, like $50?
I'd still be happy. I even said I didn't mind having a portion of the payout cut down in the original comment.
This particular one, on the other hand, is original even compared to content outside Hive. I am not sure how about in English, but if I wrote something like that in Czech, it could be published in one of our travel magazines, and paid even better ;)
Congrats! I never made it into this league!
Thanks :) Getting this one isn't easy :))
Hello!
So, would you have to stop following community and individual trails to avoid being in a trail and having your posts voted on by others?
I'm asking because I think that's what's happening to me. I'm seeing posts of mine where, without me really intending to vote for myself, there are votes cast by me, and I don't like that.
I think that in order to avoid that you need to blacklist yourself, I don't know how that works though. But I once read a post by someone big (big enough to maybe be irked by me mentioning his name) the he black listed himself on the trails he followed to avoid that kind of situation, so I know it is feasible, but I just don't know how it is done the deed.
The thing is, I don't know how to do that yet. Besides, I still don't believe that blacklisting myself is actually beneficial. There must be some other workable solution.
The botz are the reasons why it looks as if the hive blockchain is very active if you remove them you see how dead the chain and how earnings will drop drastically, in as much as we want to fight abuse some of the features of operating bots and using the account how users see fits is why it seems abit decentralized stop bot and see how the chain fall apart. My own little 2 cent contribution! Because account like hive watch will blacklist an account ask u too contact them on discord with no one responding to your message or appeal.
The chain is gradually dieing and I hope it survives the next coming bear market.
I don't know about that. There are also a lot of people that upvote manually. But I don't know how the reward pool exactly works.
The number is smaller when compared to the bots activities, there is no way manual voting will yield thesame result as bot voting
No, I would not go that far and say it is dying, it is just not growing enough.
Everyone I introduced to hive over the years more than 500 persons have all left the chain if that's no a depreciating number for u it is for me, most of their accounts are just following curation trail and not actively blogging
At the rate we are going, the math is grim on Hive surviving the next bear. It's simple math. We have this bull market to turn it around. I say this as a crypto investor who looks at Hive compared to everything else: we cannot keep finding ways to run people off and not end up in that forgotten pile of altcoins that is thousands deep.
That's the point, hive doesn't give new users sufficient time to settle in the blockchain b4 kicking them out, sadly alot of persons will disagree with me but the truth is kinda bitter! Everyone likes making money for free and before someone would want to invest his or Her funds in a project he or she wants to be sure that he can recover it in due time but here on hive investors are chased out of the blockchain for make one mistake, I get it people abuse the blockchain but that's what true decentralization brings, even when the user wants to change and correct his or her wrong doings the terms are insane, who wants to work for 3 months without pay while his colleague goes home daily with pay checks
Excellent post and important topic!
I never look at the trending posts exactly for this reason. Any upvote on them just favors the already well rewarded posts. If @peakd could create the opposite, e.g. posts with hardly any rewards but of a certain length or level of interaction, that would be great.
And yes, I check in the meantime regularly the KE-ratio (with this tool) of users I don´t know before I give any bigger upvote.
An additional but somewhat provocative idea could be a regular (e.g. daily) automatically generated (according to some rules) list of potentially over-rewarded posts and users with some free downvoting mana could scroll and pick some for downvoting - I know that many are afraid of retaliation downvotes but maybe some whales/orcas could interact or be ready to act against retaliation downvotes by upvotes to those brave quality curators. Just brainstorming.
The rules of what is considered as over-rewarded are of course tricky, but the level of repetitiveness vs. original content and a lack of comments in comparison to the rewards could be a first indication.
I would like to see this too! I would say a certain lengt and level of interaction. And also a couple of hours old.
That's good! I think it is quite a hassle now. It would be nice if that was visible with some other metrics like engagement next to the rather useless rep level.
This... or they could work together to do the downvoting themselves.
If there is a group of whales/orca's that minimizes the rewards on a post, chances of retaliation would be minimal I think.
But for now whales often upvote posts that already have large rewards. So there needs to come a change in habits.
Your comment is upvoted by @topcomment
Info - Support - Discord
That is an excellent suggestion and a really positive way to approach things which is unlikely to cause disappointment, argument or retaliation.
I have seen the rumble on this issue for a time now, and I have some ideas of my own. I think part of the problem is that many small and new users (voilà, comme moi) hope to make big user "notice them", and to some extent I think that is the wrong mindset, it is just not gonna work, big users notice their friends who are also big users (that is as a statistical trend, I mean).
Big accounts have concerns befitting their size, not in the sense of big concerns, but in the sense of their size determining what is relevant to them. So, red fishes and other small ones should take some things into their hands, yet they are trapped into a mentality were everything must come from bigger swimmers.
My point is we need more modest and small kind of initiatives, I am maturing mine right now, need to round some corners yet.
I agree with you on this. And I think that is why you see so much interaction under blogs from the larger stakeholders. They have the change of an upvote and maybe even a follow.
That is actually what Alex-rourke says with his "Orca's unite". But how do you unite the redfish. Together they have a lot of stake, but maybe they should use it to upvote other redfish.
For the time being I'm coordinating a protect aimed to increase the visibility of smaller users who put up good content, we cannot generate a significative upvotes but we can (i hope so) increase somewhat their visibility. The idea is still being discussed but we hope to have it up and running soon.
Interesting!
Thanks for the mention. Very happy that we talk about that.
Lot of thing to talk about. I try to cover some.
I’m not against autovote, but i think that there are a lot of zombie account that don’t write nothing for years but are sett le on a curation trial or autovote and continue voting.
Maybe that people are death, maybe owners has lost the account’s keys, maybe they are not interesting in Hive anymore, but they continuosly vote same accounts.
New feeds or filter on front-ends are a good idea.
Reputation now is useless. I prefer by far the KE. KE should not be the ONLY element to consider, but could be ONE OF the paramethers to consider when you vote a post.
Anyway a KE 2.0 or a different value instead of actual reputation could be an opportunity.
More point to discuss but i have to go now.
Anyway, great post! Let’s talk about this things!
That! Zombies making easy money.
I'm still looking for a way and a place to continue this discussion.
I am not if this is true or not, not sure how to meassure it. But just that people think and feel this is very offsetting and bad for us if we ever want to reach more people.
I dont have any solutions to share, I just know that we might loose people no matter what. Downvoting can lead to people feeling discourage and leave and not doing anything can discourage people who have been here a while but not feeling acknowledge.
I think its excellent anyways that short-form is a thing now. Opens up new ways of finding new people and for some people its much easier to do short form rather than blogging.
Upvotes within 1 minute of posting a 7 minute read blog like this one is a clear sign.
There will always be people who don't like the change and those who do. And is it really bad to loose a couple of people that are unhappy? If we get new, enthusiastic people in their place. I do think the user retention would improve when we have a better distribution of rewards.
Yeah thats pretty good sign. Could auto-voting represent that people dont wanna upvote a particular post, instead they wanna upvote the users as a whole?
Just trying to speculate here. I dont use auto-voting for my own account and dont look at maximizing my curation apr.
I think so to. And probably would Blurt be a bigger success if downvoting was the big issue.
I think it's often a matter of maximizing curation rewards. Or upvoting posts from friends I think.
Probably. Could one solution be that you can choose then if you wanna vote on posts, but dont have auto voting, or have a other type of vote where you say I wany user x to have my vote. Not sure how that vote value would be calculated or so. But maybe you choose that like once a week or something instead and if you dont check in these votes decay?
Not sure if I make myself clear or not 🧐
I have for some time felt there needs to be a better method to find new authors/content, but admit I don't know what a good method of discovery would be that is better. It might be interesting to have a bit of an algorithm to feed information based on our content likes that could be explored when wanted.
That is a good idea! In PeakD you have the community feed which shows posts from the communities you have subscribed to. That would give you some posts that you are interested in.
But a stream based on your upvotes or interactions in comments would be better. I think this could be possible with current AI technologies.
Autovotes make it too easy to reward bad posts. I like the idea of manual voting, it keeps things fair for everyone, especially new users who work so hard to make impact on the platform
But there must be a technical way to stop autovotes, but I don't think there is.
I doubt there is otherwise someone would have already used it to stop the auto votes
The Krampus Coefficient (KE) is NOT just a ratio. Go read Azircon the Cabal Lord, and how that mind works, and understand: Krampus is a mythical demon that beats and eats children to scare others into compliance -- and Azircon and Galen backed an account called Plonkety Piano to mock and terrorize people they were using KE score to find without any regard to the lives of the people. That stopped because some whales understood the danger of the reputation of the WHOLE CHAIN was at risk and stuffed it -- but go look up Plonkety Piano and its imagery and behavior on your own time. The cruelty of Krampus IS THE POINT, and this has already been demonstrated -- and on a chain when MANY users are the descendants of the survivors of colonialism and enslavement, that is not the kind of imagery that we need if we want to keep this chain vibrant -- no reminders of European beating and consuming the people of the world are going to be helpful when it is so many people of the world that SURVIVED THAT who are getting Hive adopted and noticed for good. There are some legacies Hive should really avoid touching.
If I was azircon, I would still smile looking at your comment although we might disagreed on it.
You are right and he is right too. That's life. Sometimes no one is wrong.
Thanks for showing another pov so people can make their own independent decisions.
You're welcome. Everybody gets to choose what legacy they want to be part of. I just am making sure the whole story is out here.
Your comment and thoughts here have perfectly hit on a conundrum that keeps coming up with this whole discussion:
To this I would ask if you are aware of the ethnicities of the two users you mention above? We actually only see of users here what they choose to share on here, so it is risky to make accusations or assumptions.
The problem with this whole discussion is that we're trying to fix problems and the solutions are being based on assumptions of why people are doing what they are doing. As dlmmqb has already hinted, everyone can be both right and wrong in their reasoning and approaches. The witnesses are in the inenviable position of having to try and make changes in everyone's best interest and every system put in place can be abused.
The fact that Venezuela and Ghana are Hive's two biggest stories is a fact. What was done there by European colonists is big set of facts. The mythos of Krampus, and the control that myth is designed to put into children is also a fact -- and the analog to how European colonizers treated more than a third of the world is also a fact. Also a fact: the creator of the Krampus Coefficient is the type of person who has animations of murder against people who makes comments he doesn't like among his own comments... with the murderer smiling when the victim is dead. Sounds like Krampus and colonial behavior to me ... but go write "nice post" on one of his posts and find out sometimes... go look up Plonkety Piano that he backed up and how it behaved, and come back and tell me what you think.
I don't care what ethnicity anybody is, but I know the historical origins of certain evils. If you adopt those to try to get people to do what you want, there is a good chance you don't have a problem abusing people to get what you want. If you play with devilry, I'm likely to suspect you of devilish behavior, and I have seen enough. I say again: have a look at Plonkety Piano and what it was doing and THINK about what the ramifications there would have been and how Hive's reputation would have been attached to that with its LAST 138K active users according to Hive's five-year stats. Think to yourself: why did far bigger accounts than mine choose to STUFF THAT THING?
Don't mistake me, I'm not defending anyone or criticising you. Just attempting to point out that we rarely know anyone fully on here or their motives. They likely feel like they're doing the right thing, whether they are or not. It's certainly not how I would approach things and I appreciate you sharing your point of view.
That other account is plain peculiar, but we've encountered these sorts of things on Hive before, haven't we. I suspect we'll encounter them again as well. Do we become dicatators and shut them down or try to find ways to mitigate the damage?
I know what people choose to show me. That's the best I can do. As for being a dictator, I am a triple dolphin on Hive with a powerful voice in real life, and an equally memorable communication style in print. I'm a professional. In my home city, when the powers-who-think-they-be try to do things against the neediest, based on the same colonizing and enslaving playbook, they find out that I know that playbook and will show up and wrap them up in it. I am consistent everywhere. On my watch, no one will find me silent while they do a reign of terror on Hive based on demonic concepts against human beings who have the right to do what they wish with their own rewards. I already know what would have happened by now. I watched Plonkety Piano attack the account of someone who powered down to get resources to save someone else's life -- I already know what the plan was.
I am ONLY talking on Hive about these matters for now, because we are somewhere below 138K users. The lowest figure I have now heard is a mere 5,000 users. We do not need one more piece of bad press. We do not need one more person leaving here talking about being abused. Krampus is, AT BEST, a centuries-old European concept of abuse of human beings -- Europe's own children, before getting to Africa, Asia, and the Americas and their children. There is no way around that fact. Plonkety Piano is an image of abuse, and was used just for that. There is no way around that fact. I will not be silenced -- I am an Amazon best-selling crypto author, so I can talk much more widely than this. But I'm not doing that because I hope that Hive will choose not to adopt abusive imagery and practices on top of the problems we already have.
May I ask your thoughts on how Hive might deal with this then?
If you mean understanding how not to run off the last 140,000 users -- or last 5,000 users, and getting a grip on the selling, here are two things to consider:
The big accounts that drive inflation are HBD Stabilizer and the Decentralized Hive Fund (DHF) that we vote on to fund projects -- those funded sell to pay various workers. It is not even the little accounts that drive that -- see Dalz's data from July 2024.
If you want to know how people use their money, it is not hard to see if they have powered down more than they have powered up; they have a wallet, and in PeakD at least you can click to see just that information. Rough add what they've powered down to what they have left. I know from having done this that you have never powered down, and have been powering up fairly consistently since Aug. 8, 2017. That took thirty seconds to determine -- if I had stopped in February 2020 when Hive proper starts, it would have taken me ten seconds. I presume we are all adults and can add ... and so I already know that attaching Krampus to figure all this out is completely unnecessary. It ought to be worth thirty seconds of our time, and maybe another minute in "All Posts" to discover the circumstances of people's lives instead of beating and eating them into submission. Had Krampus and Plonkety Piano not been involved, I would not have said that part ... but here we are.
I'm asking everyone to put in 90 seconds of caring about their fellow community members, or at least about the fact that Hive cannot survive too far below the low figure of 5,000 users and will run the risk of ending up on the altcoin ash heap of history in the next bear if indeed the number is that low and we run any significant number of them off. More of us can participate in how the DHF is assigned, and we can look at HBD Stabilizer and if is fit to purpose. It is SO EASY to punch down on people from nations still trying to recover from having EVERYTHING extracted from them by people raised by Krampus ... but it is also the wrong thing to do in the same way that colonialism and genocide and enslavement and all the reigns of terrors that went with that are wrong, and on top of that will not even work. I'm asking us to consider who we are going to support by considering the people as actual people, not just "extractors" to be dehumanized as such, especially since no matter what we decide relative to a content creator, Hive is going to keep blowing money out the door until we address the bigger issues, and the only thing we can do relative to a content creator is send one more person out the door and Hive's visibility and reputation closer to a death spiral.
I am an ACTUAL crypto investor and author -- I am a model of the very person Hive needs to attract. I know how the other half thinks and invests. If the true number is down to 5K, we are already in HUGE trouble. Even if it is at the Hive Five figure of 138K, we are in trouble. We are not growing. We are dying. Krampus and Plonkety Piano are not the best advocates to save lives. Keep that in mind.
I've been hearing these things for years. Back at the beginning some people made thousands on a post, but the rewards calculation has changed since then. There will be many different reasons why some make more than others. It is a lot about who you know and I expect that deals get done.
You can't easily control how people vote and automatic votes will probably not go away. I would encourage people to vote manually and not delegate all their HP, but many don't want to spend the time on it. Posts can have a maximum rewards, but that is set by the poster and not all front ends support setting it.
I think downvotes have a place and people will use them as they want. People like smooth tend to just take some of the rewards off. You can't really say what a post is worth though. I don't usually make enough to get noticed :)
Hive is imperfect, but it is doing amazing things. The freedom means you cannot control it all and some will not obey 'rules' set by others. We can still discuss these things though.
I would say that if you don't have the time, then delegate to a curation service that does have the time and votes manual instead of doing autovotes.
I didn't know that. But if it can be built in the front-end, why not in the blockchain itself? But no developer here and I also don't know if the devs like this idea.
I didn't find a lot of people that seem to like this idea.
I think they don't. At least, I don't dare to. I've recently seen posts of over $200, but I'm not burning my hands on downvoting it. And if I did, my $ 0.39 downvote wouldn't make a real change.
I agree with you in that. And creating a space for discussion is just what I intended to do with this blog.
I know most people don't downvote. I only do it for posts that abuse the system, e.g. plagiarism, and I've had retaliation.
I think the max value is on the blockchain. You will see that some posts from #dbuzz have it set.
Your comment is upvoted by @topcomment
Info - Support - Discord
I think autovote is okay as long as we use wisely. Manual vote also good but not guarantee that person who used manual vote will vote wisely, mostly they vote for based on dislike or like.
I use autovote for my close friends or Hiver who making post regularly and of course they make itself that post and not plagiat or use AI. Autovote is a tool it is depend on the who use it, it is kind like knife you have to use it wisely. Knife is a tool, you can use for Cook or crafting but in bad way you also can use for harm or kill someone.
Autovote is like two edge of Sword, in other edge you can use wisely but in other you can hurt someone even yourself.
Autovote is similar with downvote... You can use it wisely or you can use it for someone who you don't like it. So use it wisely and with responsible.
By the way, sorry for my bad English. God bless you.
Yes, you may use it in a good way, but other people use it get the most curation rewards with low efforts. You don't even have to visit Hive. Only to withdraw your rewards every now and then.
I see you have an erstwhile concern for Hive, and have considered these matters at length. I have also. Some things you haven't mentioned should be, so I will.
When this blockchain originated in 2016 as Steem the tokens were mined. Those folks that mined those tokens created all the stake there was and set about to distribute it to others to grow the platform by creating demand for the token. However, the platform is governed by the witnesses who run the code, and those witnesses are chosen by stake weighted voting. The ninjaminers that originally had all the stake wish to retain their governance of the platform that their possession of the majority of stake avails them. Because they determine which witnesses are in the top20 they determine how rewards are distributed from the inflation, and this is desirable for folks exercising prudent management of their assets. While the Founder's stake was sold to Sun Yuchen enabling him to arbitrarily rule the platform because that stake was the majority of tokens, because the rest of the ninjaminers did not want to lose their control of governance that @Ned had allowed them they forked the code and spawned Hive.
Hive was identical to Steem in how governance was maintained, a pure plutocracy, and the Founder's stake was replicated on Hive as the DHF, to fund development, as the Founder's had stated their ninjamined stake would be used for. After ~8 years, these ninjamined stakes retain plutocratic control of governance of Hive, and a critical tool in their arsenal is DV's, that enable them to prevent folks from accumulating stake from upvotes to threaten their possession of the majority of stake and control of governance. Clearly there is more to the story, and the bidbots, cash investors, and other issues have been involved along the way, but this is the basic outline of the journey that has brought us to where we are.
https://peakd.com/hive/@khrom/why-downvotes-contradict-decentralization-a-mathematical-perspective This post may help to explain how DV's maintain the majority stake of the governing oligarchy on Hive.
DV's are taxes. Just like pay from a job or contract work has taxes extracted from the gross pay before you can possess the net pay, rewards from upvotes can be taxed via DV's on Hive. On Hive anyone with stake can tax your earnings by DV'ing your posts and comments, to the limit of their stake. By this means the oligarchy has maintained it's majority stake and control of governance, but this has driven off ~1m people that came to the platform in 2017. Today, while the exact number is unknown for a variety of reasons, there are 3-5k human users on Hive, and perhaps millions of socks or bots that are controlled by some of those users, mostly by the oligarchs.
For folks that aren't numbered amongst the governing oligarchy, wider distribution of tokens is highly desirable. For that oligarchy, this is as wide as they want distribution to get. In order to broaden distribution, some limitations on taxation will have to be implemented. These limitations will have to be voluntarily approved by that oligarchy, because they control Hive and cannot be forced to do anything they don't want to do. Good luck convincing them to abandon their cash cow. Cash is king, and risking their proven production of ROI wouldn't be financially prudent.
Were there more people using Hive, it would be difficult for the oligarchy to prevent broader distribution of tokens, and were there less the tokens would have little value. This appears to be the happy medium they have arrived at to maximize their ROI and maintain their control of governance.
There are other issues I could address, such as curation rewards, autovotes, and more, but I have already bloviated too long.
Thanks!
I didn't know everything about Hive since I arrived after the Justin Sun soap.
I don't know if I totally share your view, but thanks for sharing your thoughts on this subject.
Here's a current example ongoing you may want to consider.
https://peakd.com/hive-140084/@freecompliments/the-user-acidyo-is-insistent-on-destroying-our-community-important-announcement-for-the-freecompliments-community-jvg#
Edit: Here is a resource that may help you understand the scale of the distribution management ongoing.
https://hivealive.io/untrending
There is so many unwritten rules on the chain in my honest opinion and not everyone know about them - every time someone downvote should make a "note" or "comment" to the post.
I think autovotes are hard to remove - unless we talk to those people that upvote some content by default just because they brown nose them since beginning of Hive existence and it stays liked that. I don't even want to dwell into huge chunks of delegations that happened 7 years ago and some people ride on it until today.
TBF less HP you have less you care what you vote for with bigger chunk your responsibility should be bigger.
On the end of the day not everyone has time to manually curate ( I prefer do it manually ) but from time to time there should be some special events on blockchain like once a year for each thing something like " COMMUNITY CHECK REMINDERS " - Re-evaluations of autovotes week , WITNESS RE-EVALUATION WEEK , PROPOSAL RE-EVALUATION WEEK and so on.
KE isn't perfect - what If someone do 10 times more outside Hive for Hive , but someone need those funds to run some initiatives off chain. How are you going to justify this ?
Your comment is upvoted by @topcomment
Info - Support - Discord
After using Hive for years, I honestly feel most authors who work hard on their content are earning far less than they deserve. Someone who spends an hour or more on a single article/post of content they carefully designed, on average I feel deserves 4x more than they received, and have to split with curators.
Even if everyone was forced to manually curate and read every post they upvote, there would still be focus on collectively supporting on the most profitable posts, leaving most people earning far less than they deserve for their posted works.
The only way around it I can imagine, is for most people to willingly offer up a portion of their daily upvotes to be randomly distributed to posts. Ideally rewarded posts or authors are pre-vetted, or ranked, to not offer these rewards to low-effort or junk posts.
As long as you're voting in the first 24hrs it doesn't make any difference to how well the post has already been rewarded. You're guaranteed a 50% return on your vote in that window, plus a bit more if anyone votes afterwards. Once past 24hrs then large accounts are unlikely to vote on it especially if it's already well rewarded. So I guess the most profitable post would be if you could predict a lot of late votes coming in.
!PIZZA
$PIZZA slices delivered:
@danzocal(1/10) tipped @friendlymoose
Moon is coming
The reward pool was the original Hive distribution mechanism to promote decentralization of the base token. The question that should be asked is “Is content creation rewards still the best distribution model 9 years later?”
It is my understanding that the base token serves two primary roles: 1) ensuring the security of the blockchain through governance voting and 2) providing access to the blockchain through resource credits.
If the blockchain was launched again with the tools available to us now, is our current system the one we would design? If not, what would that system look like? My guess is that this new system would treat blogging rewards different than we do now.
Certainly food for thought
Congratulations @friendlymoose! Your post has been a top performer on the Hive blockchain and you have been rewarded with this rare badge
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out our last posts:
Hello, here the burning has been great!!!! 😃
I will give my opinion briefly.
Undoubtedly many of these things you have mentioned hurt Hive and I don't know to what extent the appearance of a meme coin called HBD, just like ours, can hurt us externally. A lot of things have happened because of that, I don't know why such a thing is happening and who is responsible for listing it under a name that already exists.
But what hurts Hive the most and these are two things that happen here within the blockchain is dishonesty and the use of economic power with malice.
Here those with economic power do everything in plain sight and are untouchable. They have multi-accounts, they milk Hive on a larger scale and in the end I really resent the incoherence of their speeches.
Aren't they here for the money? And why are they here, for philanthropy? Where do they place money in their scale of motivations for being in Hive? That may vary.
But when it comes to talking about milkers, all eyes turn to the third world. To those who have no possibilities, who found in Hive an escape to live with some decency, to provide a little for their families. Is this a bad thing? I don't see it that way. Besides, there is free will. I, myself, do you think I have all that HP because I get it through the pipeline? I have it because I have limited myself from many things. Even sometimes even from buying food that I need. And why do I do that? It's up to me. Because at the moment I don't have money at the top of my list but I can't deny you that I cherish the illusion of seeing Hive in 1 or 3 so I can have a few thousand in my account and solve important issues for me like buying a camera, fixing my house, travelling I'm 45 years old and I haven't left this fucking island.... but that's my business. And no one is obliged to vote on my posts either.
However, it's also up to me to dedicate all the time I dedicate to Hive, to comment and to support the creators who I think do a great job. You among them.
You have to be careful what you propose and how you propose it. What doors you knock on. Because there really are abusers everywhere and the worst are those who have power. I have always said that this is like life itself. I am not naming names here, nor am I interested in mentioning anyone. Everyone knows their own business.
I know a person who is building her house because her husband gives her the money, and I know what she has to put up with from that husband. By her own choice, of course, because she can't seem to find any other way to build her house. This is just one example. It applies here too because that's life.
Well, that wasn't brief.
I think they should focus on quality, on interaction, on fostering a sense of community and not selfishness. I see a lot of people who come and post and don't even take the trouble to look at what others are doing. The so called gurus who already have the votes secured, are the ones who do harm here. They power down left and right and no one says anything to them, but they are busy watching the poor people who get 3 dollars to eat that day.
I myself have sometimes said that they shouldn't do it, that they should power up their accounts, that they should balance and think a little bit about the future. But you have to be in people's shoes.
I repeat, quality, interaction, being seen to care about something... not about what people do with their money. That's a personal choice.
Your comment is upvoted by @topcomment
Info - Support - Discord
Gracias @lauramica y @topcomment 👋
That also is what I observe -- people punch down on folks in need, but nobody will call out the biggest milkers of all. It's the wickedest thing on Hive -- and will destroy it if we don't change.
🤷🏻
Brilliant post, I enjoyed reading this and have so many opinions on these problems too, sadly I can offer no solutions. I now understand that the hive really does mirror the real world. There are always those that abuse the system, money is the root of all evil. Humans are greedy the rich will always leech whilst the poor toil at the coal face.
The politicians and the bishops will always sit at their tables feasting whilst sending ordinary decent people to die in wars. The corporate banker and hedge fund manager, the capital venturists, playing with other peoples money a complete disregard for the people affected. It's all about the money honey and fuck all else.
I will probably disappoint many with my opinion, but this is what HIVE serves. For sharing our views with others and discuss... While I do agree with most of your thoughts on this topic, only one is something that is possible to do... The rest will not gonna happen for different reasons, and some of them are listed in the comments by other contributors to this post...
Some of them are protecting your "status" or just being too subjective... You like one thing, I like the other, and we would like to push our "agenda" on each other as of course, I'm right, and not you... The basics of decentralization are still far away from our current way of thinking...
The thing that I would like to see, and it shouldn't be complicated to implement, is better filtering of posts on frontends... Trending posts are usually those that are heavily supported by whale accounts and do not represent the content that is "most read"... Also, seeing posts supported by whales makes them easy "pray" for other whales to harvest more curation rewards as nobody would downvote another whale... It's hard to grasp, but I didn't notice that whales are eating whales...
So, like Google changing their algorithm for a search, we should have more dynamic filters and algorithms for our frontends... Giving more visibility to posts that spark more (REAL) engagement, more discussion, more value...
In the end, all this wouldn't be important at all if we had more utilities for HIVE, more use cases... Nobody would care about the distribution of HIVE if you were able to spend it or earn it in some other ways like it happens on other blockchains... Do you care who mined BTC tokens or ETH tokens? No...
We had a similar situation with HBD when we had a discussion about the APR, the supply growing, etc. But when Distriator came, more businesses began accepting HBD (and hopefully more will come), and nobody found the supply as an issue... I hope that a day similar to that will come for HIVE... We would be happy when someone sells HIVE for cheap, as it has more value, more use cases... You will be happy to see people with high KE as they would be your source of cheap HIVE!
Sorry about being a bit off-topic... Nice to see a lot of comments on the post as it means that people CARE about this place!
I have picked this post on behalf of the @OurPick project! Check out our Reading Suggestions Posts!
Please consider voting for our Liotes HIVE Witness. Thank you!
I think this could really help. I've notified both ecency as peakd of this discussion. I hope they can do something with this.
No problem. It is really good to see the engagement on these topics.
Thanks for selecting it for the @ourpick reading suggestions.
Extracting this from your comment, @ph1102:
Would I be correct with my understanding this could be done at any time? Since it would not require a hard fork to the underlying blockchain code itself?
Either way, I would love to see this implemented. I am biased, of course, by my experience as a new contributor of content. That said, anyone with any common sense can see this aspect of participating as one more challenge to overcome.
Why is it still in place, after the passage of so much time? It does not matter what I think the answer might be. Whatever it is, it will be up to others to decide whether it warrants consideration for being fixed.
I suppose it would need the collecting of metrics from different frontends, which shouldn't be more complicated than changing the HIVE code...
I suppose as it was the easiest to implement... As you have all the data on the chain, just pull out the data and sort by upvotes values...
Trending based on post interaction would actually be good. The problem is that by the time most posts are getting interaction they're coming to the end of the 24hr window that gives the best return on votes, so are less likely to receive further votes from accounts that prioritise returns.
You are right about the 24h window and number of views... I can't remember why we did that 24h limit in the first place. To combat big upvotes for the rest of the 6 days?
Maybe it's not relevant anymore and we could get rid of it.. and prolong "life" of posts to at least 3-4 days, or a full week...
There is much more field for improvement for frontends in this matter. There should be bunch of funtionalities helping finding new valuable content, AI assistent helping with blockchain analysis and custimized algorythms helping determine value of content for curators.
I think so to.
If we are presented the valuable, underrewarded posts, they would probably get less underrewarded.
By adding #bilpcoin or #bpc to original posts, you can earn BPC tokens
https://peakd.com/hive-140084/@bpcvoter1/my-way-keni-bpc-ai-music
https://peakd.com/hive-126152/@bpcvoter2/dear-themarkymark-buildawhale-gogreenbuddy-usainvote-ipromote-and-whoever-else-is-involved-in-this-scheme-you-call-us-nutty-as
https://peakd.com/hive-167922/@bilpcoinbpc/exploring-the-possibilities-of-ai-art-with-bilpcoin-nfts-episode-102-buildawhale-scam-farm-on-hive-and-dear-steevc
https://peakd.com/hive-133987/@bilpcoinbpc/comprehensive-analysis-of-punkteam-s-wallet-transactions
https://hive.blog/hive-163521/@bpcvoter1/deep-dive-into-meritocracy-s-activity-history-and-blockchain-audit
https://www.publish0x.com/the-dark-side-of-hive/to-downvoters-scammers-and-farmers-on-hive-the-time-to-chang-xmjzrmp
https://peakd.com/hive-163521/@bpcvoter3/themarkymark-we-ve-exposed-your-actions-repeatedly-how-you-and-your-army-of-bots-manipulate-rewards-to-benefit-yourselves-it-s
https://peakd.com/hive-168088/@bpcvoter3/the-shadow-matrix-a-tale-of-deceit-and-reckoning
Decentralization isn’t just a feature—it’s a fight. Let’s model fairness, rally allies, and pressure Hive to live up to its ideals.
#StandForDecentralization #HiveTransparency
I have to say that I was using autovotes for awhile but then decided to cancel this setup, I enjoy curation because my posts in themselves are curations of what I find interesting. So it's all very recursive in that sense.
Other than that, I would love to see some suggestions implemented, to level the playing field as it were.
Excellent content, @friendlymoose. I have read every word of the post you have clearly invested a lot of time into publishing. As a new account publishing content on the Hive blockchain, I have bookmarked this for future reference. There are many aspects of participating on this blockchain on which we should reflect. Newbie and oldbie (your new word? I like it!) alike.
For any who have a similar perspective, you have provided an invaluable service where one can find very important concepts we all need to understand linked together in one place.
My limited response to your post, is based upon these excerpts, at the end of it:
While new to publishing on Hive, I am not new to the new asset class we typically refer today as crypto. From that experience base, here is my contribution to food for thought:
Underlying challenges to progress:
Work. How honestly and openly does this foundational aspect of life get addressed, by any crypto? How do we properly characterize the energy expended to resist it?Human nature. How honestly and openly does this foundational challenge get addressed, by any crypto? WIIFM is a powerful force that cannot be ignored, however one expresses their reluctance to acknowledge it.Printing. Is it possible to create something of genuine, tangible value "out of thin air?" Am I the only one who finds it ironic that Satoshi Nakamoto's stated motivation for creating Bitcoin was a response to printing fiat into oblivion?I believe how these 3 key concepts are addressed has a lot to do with how profitably any crypto performs over time. Does the creation of the Hive blockchain represent an exception? In a remarkable number of instances, in my reading at least, leading to descriptions containing words like Utopia?
As you rightly say, much of what is being pondered, in even beginning to talk about the challenges this blockchain faces, is subjective.
My subjective opinion will now be published on it.
Thanks again for writing this post. 🤝
Agree with everything in your post.
only this part here
It is a very good topic that you brought and I hope others tip you or vote in other posts
Thanks!
I burnt the rewards because I mentioned a couple of users with a big stake and I didn't want to make it look like I was fishing for upvotes. That would have been a shame.
It's fine. The post has a lot of engagement!
Thanks for the tip by the way!
Autovotes - If I couldn't set AUTO Votes up, there would almost no incentive to hold Hive Power, most people are too busy to curate all day. If they would periodically reset after 13, 26 or 52 weeks that would be fine.
Blind upvotes - Ditto, sometimes I upvote based on the picture or because the person upvoted me and I am familiar with them not a shit poster. What's wrong with that?
Explore algorithms - Not Hive's problem, if you don't like a front end, don't use it
Votes for delegations - The best solution would be to periodically reset such delegations every 13, 26 or 52 weeks, the only other option is to just downvote such groups (good luck.) But seriously why crush this business?
The reward cap - Why? Some posts are infinitely better than others, price controls are put on a currency, it's a bad sign. I'm out.
Downvotes - Do it! This is the mechanism to combat abuse but it has started wars in the past.
The main issues with Hive is that the supply does not align with the demand, they should limit inflation when there is higher selling pressure and the price will go up.
These are discussions that have come up often over the years. In my opinion out of Steem, Blurt and Hive, Hive has actually done the better out of the 3 forks in actually finding some sort of balance in this regard.
With every one of these suggestions you are going to inadvertently cause pain to someone who didn't deserve it and even past adjustments to the code have likely done that. There is no system that can't be abused and always the risk of things turning into a full dictatorship when you place more restrictions to try and stop that abuse.
Just as an example, is autovoting bad or is it just how it's used? I both manually and autovote (mainly manually). My autovotes go to authors that I know always write well and often not regularly, but because my time on here is restricted I often miss those posts in their voting window. Yes, I could just comment and vote their response, but it doesn't indicate the value of the post the same way as a direct 'like'. Besides, if the post is still undervalued I have have the opportunity to also add value to their responses. Am I wrong to use autovoting in this way? Even if we remove Hive.voter, people can still programme their own bots; this is how HSBI will work. Indeed projects like this are people responding to what they see as injustices by creating something to counter them, which is a beautiful thing and ultimately the goal of the original creators was to allow this kind of experimentation. Projects like ocd and curangel sprung up to try and address spreading the share of the pool more equally.
Interestingly curangel were doing this, but stopped due to potential disagreement as to whether a post was over rewarded or not, which was a good call in my opinion after seeing the results of one incident. They now only downvote abuse.
Yes and no. Yes, for instance by downvoting a $100+ blog you are possible going to hurt someone who thinks people dislike the content. But wouldn't this person be happy with if their blog would receive $80?
And the idea to improve the feeds or filter out the highest for people would probably have the same effect. But then without the downvotes that may cause frustration.
I think the way you use it is acceptable. But there are also account with a high stake that don't interact and only gather curation rewards by autovotes. That is milking to me.
And that is the main issue with this I think. Opinions differ on this topic. Rewards and valuation are very subjective.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Yeah, I think you (or was it someone in the comments?) covered the dangers of downvoting someone with more HP than yourself. I feel like Smooth is the only one in the enviable position to do that and not have to deal with the retaliation. I'm just glad he/she has decided to use it fairly benevolently. I know some will still complain at anything being taken off the top line as well, especially if they're used to receiving that level of votes. I've had to explain to a couple of people that Acid's downvotes are not a reflection of their content quality and thankfully they were accepting of the trim he decided they needed in the end.
BTW is good to know blocktrades is looking into the reputation score side of things. It's come up a few times over the years that it could really do with being revised. We have accounts on here who do a lot for the chain and community but rarely post, so their rep score is low, then accounts that are constantly posting mediocre stuff with high rep scores, but they aren't really involved with anything and regularly power down.
Yes, as I started your article, I was surprised that it is extraordinarily long.
This is obvious, but can the community really do something to correct this?
I think the community has power. As long as we can agree on solutions and work together to combat abuse.