That is the reality of the system and the way voting/code works, sure. But do you think it is in the spirit of the platform though?
If someone's post has dozens(previously said hundreds)of comments on it, or draws in lots of outside users, I wouldn't think a post like that should be downvoted. The rewards might look excessive, but those users are doing something for the platform in terms of engagement.
There is definitely a point in where your downvotes are accomplishing the opposite of what you intend to do(and you have recently done that at least a few times). You want more users coming here and positive experience and positive PR for Hive just like we all do. I think you should take a look at some of the criteria you use when downvoting. Some of the people you are downvoting or the people who are witnessing what is happening are going to leave, and they drive decent engagement with their content.
I'm not saying stop downvoting or anything like that, but maybe there is a possibility for a small change to your approach?
I made a post the other day where I was thinking we should just limit posts to 50 USD max per post(as an example). And the responses to that post is that people want to earn more than 50 USD max per post. The community wants to earn more and the people with the staked power want to see more downvotes. How we can square this circle I don't know, but some conversations might help.
Hundreds of comments? I just scrolled down the trending page and I didn't see any with more than 50 comments, a lot had less than 10. Some have zero! There are plenty of highly rewarded posts on here with very little engagement.
In fact, you could make the case that the biggest driver of engagement is downvotes.
I will update my comment to dozens of comments.
Curious though, do you have a post with your criteria on why you downvote? Like an explanation post?
As I've said many times, for the most part my downvotes are an opinion that the rewards are too high. It is completely subjective. The system tallies the votes and pays rewards after 7 days.
Of course, I will also on occasion make votes for other reasons, but that's 90% of it at least.
"For the most part" leaves a huge loophole for many instances of the possibility of dishonest intentions. That needs to be pointed out, whether there are good intentions or not. It's a nice get out clause that can be shaped into whatever reason you want it to be for PR purposes, and that is the problem here. Many people can see though this, and the clarification on this point is a lot more important than you make it appear.
"For the most part" in this instance means there may be other reasons such as plagiarism, but usually not since I don't search for those things the way others do.
Let's be honest though, you didn't downvote this post for excessive rewards or plagiarism, but because I called out your tactics as abuse and challenged the supposedly ethical nature of your downvoting, same reason you downvoted @thoughts-in-time recent post calling you out. You nullified rewards because you didn't like what we said, which is clearly punitive in these instances, which just proves our point. But hey, thanks for not bringing the posts down to zero, that is the commendable side of your less than honest actions!
If I think an argument is poorly constructed, pointless, or harmful then yes I don't think it should be rewarded.
Yes, I absolutely consider this post to be overrewarded. Complaining about getting downvoted or getting less rewards should never be rewarded IMO. In fact I'd rather see such posts if they are made at all to decline rewards or donate them. They don't add value in any way that calls for payment.
👍
i'm dumping my 20,000 HIVE and buying THETA.
not because i'm being downvoted, i'm strangely NOT downvoted.
but because i've seen way too many unfair downvotes.
@truthforce, That’s the one thing I was really hoping he would clarify in response to this post, but seems to circle around the issue with a ten foot pole, instead insisting downvotes are never punitive despite others targeting free speech they hate without debate/engagement and repeating it is our right to downvote. I would think it only fair there be a criteria laid out, some method to the madness so at least the community understands why, and that is what numerous people have now been pressing for an answer on, but so far to no avail.
We know the chain is setup to allow downvotes, @smooth, we are only asking that you rethink whether this practice is the best way to encourage growth when it is causing people to leave for friendlier platforms, and I know it is not you alone giving so many downvotes without leaving comments with explanation on the posts you hit, but even just telling us how you determine what constitutes overcompensation in your opinion, when you are at the same time willing to upvote highly rewarded posts upvoted by the auto voting rancho and Haejin when many are under the impression you are attempting to counter their vote ‘abuse’ as many see those 2 accounts.
Some clarification would be appreciated, but nice to see you are using your power to upvote content now, especially folks that truly look to be in need.
That an account frequently makes dumb upvotes that overreward does not mean that every single vote is bad or that I will disagree with it. Stopped clock and all.
But you will not clarify for us what criteria you use to determine ‘good’ upvotes versus ‘bad’ or what specifically causes you to disagree with high payout in the cases you downvote, or what you deem to be ‘too high’ of rewards?
This lack of clarification, the upvotes not accompanied by comment explaining each time, and general subjectivity of it all without a completely clear reasoning for ppl to understand makes it easy to view your votes as targeting specific content and users, and the reason ppl are leaving Hive. As those whose rewards are being policed, it’d be nice to know the ‘rules’ of the game from those doing the policing.
Just know you along with few other whales helped drive many users away with this rampant abuse of power and lack of transparency on your part, although the pattern is rather transparent for all to see as to what you consistently deem over-rewarded and what you see as acceptable for high payouts. I know you have the right according to the blockchain code and view your actions as in the best interest of The community, but all tyrants do the same, so enjoy stamping us blockchain peasants down, it’s what the rich and powerful are usually best at anyway. Good luck using your power to punish rather than reward, its a sad path to travel being so negatively oriented, I hope you find a way to use your power in a more positive way in the future and wish you all the best, despite the 3 downvotes in a row and all.
He will never do that. He will also never admit that some of the downvotes are deliberately targeting particular types of posts/authors/themes. I'm sure that some of the flagging is legitimate for good reasons or intentions, but there are too many cases where it seems to defy the stated facts around it. Also, there are some others that you can be just as critical of, for doing the same thing, that are even more obvious about their targeting of certain themes and the contents of posts.
I think you know who I'm talking about here. Especially when it comes to certain "curation" groups and accounts that had links to certain individual accounts. This was happening way before the huge bullrun and increased payouts on posts that we have seen more recently, and in fact started before the fork from steemit.
Of course not, but now it is on record that he has refused to do so after being pressed by several users seeking clarification. It is also plain as day that certain content is being targeted, as I pointed out in my post - anti-establishment views to be generic, particularly on the subjects of corona, vaccines, and pharmaceutical medicine vs. natural healthy living. Oppressors don't tend to be honest and forthright about their reasons for oppressing others, bullies always believe they have a right to bully others, and we are dealing with a blockchain bully, plain and simple, with the same mentality of street cops / politicians / corporate executives thinking they have more rights than the rest of us because they have more power.
Oh yeah, there are for sure a number of others I referenced without naming names in the opening of my post whose wrath I have experienced firsthand on and off from the time my posts began getting decent views on Steemit, which was oddly the only part of the post that brought about a direct response from smooth, claiming downvotes are never punitive. What a joke, of course they are punitive, a downvote fits every aspect of the dictionary and encyclopedia definitions of 'punishment', they are a deterrent to certain 'bad' behavior, it's just ridiculous high rewards and politically incorrect speech gets lumped in with spam and plagiarism as blockchain 'crimes' :)
Of late, it seems altleft has been the biggest punisher of the anti-establishment dissent on the platform, but there are others including curation trails I'm aware of that I won't name, although I'm sure you are more familiar with all the connections than myself. It's gotten so bad I've had the past 7 research-based posts of mine in a row downvoted, all but one with massive removal of rewards, but that's fine, the covid cultists and establishment bootlickers are showing their true colors, and I just feel blessed to making any good rewards at all.
I made this post because a number of users have had enough and are leaving, and I was hoping those who claimed to care about the 'community' would see what they are doing by driving good content creators away, but it doesn't seem they truly care about growth on here, only about enriching their own massive reward pools through various means and maintaining a monopoly on power, by increasing value of hive and through leverage of their power to reap rewards. You just gotta love the hundreds of hbd-funder spam comments under their posts raking in hundred dollar payouts all day long while those who actually spend hours to create original and well-researched content are downvoted by these whales claiming to 'better hive'.
I suspect certain small independents voices leaving is in fact the intended consequence of their actions.
If explanatory comments accompanied these downvotes every time, such behavior wouldn't be half as bad, but the refusal to accompany big downvotes with explanation comments on the post being downvoted is in my opinion the worst part about the incessant downvotes here (as it was the problem on Steem as well). This lack of transparency and the clear downvote patterns available for all to see show us everything we need to see.
Thanks so much for the comment and have a great week!
We wouldn't have this problem with a 1000mv vote limit in place.
Let me just separate my stake out into multiple accounts and we are right back here again.
Yes, and once the community figures out you are a pariah, maybe they will downvote you and all who you vote, too.
But what if I'm acid?
I'll need more data.
Lol, let's hope not.
Just a reference so I can better understand what you mean by 'acid'.