Allen Taylor
Over 1.2k subscribers
Collect this post and earn yourself 500 TAYL tokens.
Last week, I talked about downvotes on Hive. Is there a downvote problem? If there is, can it be solved? There was quite a discussion on Hive about the perceived issue. Some people are really passionate about their views on this subject. If you didn't catch the podcast episode with @unklebonehead and @kencode from last week, you can watch it below:
Yesterday, Bone, Ken, and I got together for another podcast discussion on the Hive5 proposal presented by @agorise. Before we launched into Section 2 of the proposal, I presented some reasons why people might be resistant to new ideas, on Hive or anywhere, and its relevance to the Hive5 proposal.
I came up with a list of six reasons why someone might be opposed to an idea. There may be more, but here's my list.
They might think it's a really bad idea
They are resistant to change. and it could be ANY change, hence it will be ALL change
They may not understand it, or may not fully comprehend the implications of the change
They don't think it will fix the problem
They don't think there is a problem to fix
They have some turf to protect and are geared toward protecting that turf
You can go to any organization, centralized or decentralized, and find people who have presented some idea they believe will make a positive impact and there will be people who disagree or oppose the idea. In most cases, one of these reasons, either on the conscious level or the unconscious level, will be in play. I would hasten to say that, in most cases, the thinking process is on the conscious level.
Nevertheless, I'll ask you to keep these in the back of your mind over the next few weeks as we discuss the Hive5 proposal on Hive. The purpose for this discussion is three-fold:
To help non-Hive users better understand the Hive ecosystem
To facilitate healthy conversation regarding the Hive rewards system
To stir the pot (sorry, but I have to be honest here; I do like stirring the pot)
Without further ado, let's get into the meat of our present discussion.
Due to the time we spent on the above discussion and the amount of time we anticipate spending on the next part of the discussion, Ken, Bone, and I decided to discuss only the 2A part of the proposal. Section 2 is divided into 4 constituent parts with varying degrees of relationship to each other. We managed to get through 2A yesterday.
But what does 2A say? Simply, it provides a brief overview of how one's income on Hive is affected by upvotes and downvotes. In short, upvotes and downvotes make up the totality of rewards for most people on Hive, however, there are other ways to earn rewards on the blockchain. Let's dive in.
Agorise included a nifty little table in his proposal that gives a great overview of income as it relates to upvotes and downvotes. Here's the table:
As you can see, there are two sections to the table. The first is a pro/con list about how one's income on Hive is reduced due to downvotes and the second is about how one's income is increased due to upvotes. Again, it involves a pro/con comparison.
At first glance, we can see that the list only has one point on both the pro and con side for reduced income due to downvotes. But I'd say these are vitally important points.
No one on Hive, that I've ever witnessed, would defend paying rewards to pedophiles, pornographers, doxxers, plagiarists, hackers, and other internet trolls. Therefore, reducing their income is desirable. The downvote button does that (how it does that will be taken up later. On the flipside, it can deter some people from posting for fear that they will be the target of downvotes. Agorise points out that this could also be a pro because we want the trolls to be deterred from posting. I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that some people on the blockchain would consider it a pro that the downvote button can be used to reduce the rewards of posts that have been overcompensated. Therefore, it acts as a countermeasure to an abundance of upvotes for less-than-stellar posts (which does happen).
Regarding the increase of income due to upvotes, Agorise lists four pros and one con. On the pro side, he cites the ability to earn an income, increase one's reputation on the blockchain, it encourages user onboarding and serves as free word-of-mouth advertising for Hive, and it creates a self-sufficient economy of values at scale.
Regarding Point No. 3, "word of mouth" advertising, it would seem logical that if that is a benefit to the upvote, a consequent negative for decreasing income from the downvote button is word-of-mouth detractors badmouthing the platform for its perceived abuses. These go hand in hand, in my opinion. If increasing one's income from the upvote button is a pro because people will say good things about Hive and recruit their friends, then when those who have been downvoted into oblivion leave the blockchain and post on other platforms about how Hive only benefits the whales (those with a lot of Hive Power), that must be a con for the downvote button. These two values are like Lincoln logs; they can't exist without each other.
The con to having increased income with upvotes, for Agorise, is that internet trolls could profit from their bad behavior ("INITIALLY") until the community gets involved and downvotes them to a negative reputation.
For an engaging discussion on these points, check out the latest Defluenced podcast:
This is the Hive rewards system in a nutshell. Next week, we'll discuss HOW one's income is affected by upvotes and downvotes, and you won't want to miss it because it's a DOOZY.
Collect this post and earn yourself 500 TAYL tokens.
