My first question would be whether a community decoupled from Hive would be able to live without the DV button.
Would that be technically possible?
Why not give up on something that once made sense but may no longer have any?
It's like governments, once they have introduced certain laws - because of an emergency, for example - they don't like to remove them very much again.
The idea is to abolish the DV as a feature again and see what happens when you can only upvote. If plagiarism or spam starts to accumulate, the feature could be discontinued if necessary.
Personally, I don't think much of overly fixed and elaborate rules, because they lead to more and more sub-rules in the free space. Those who have dealt with law books or seen catalogues of regulations grow may know what I mean.
The phrase "over-rewarded", for example, is a wolf in sheep's clothing for me. Here a vocabulary dresses itself up in something harmless, but behind the intention that someone has been over-rewarded, there is open space for interpretation that wants to be filled. Minds are inflamed about this and finding a consensus on it seems impossible to me.
A positive anarchy in which people are trusted to deal with situations in a different way - if you are interested in reading something about this, please let me know (there is fantastic material on this!).
I think the blockchain and those who are active here have certain intentions - keyword decentralisation - and also see this as a learning and experimentation field, where one wants to do things differently than in the corporate and government world? Or is this just about upvotes, curation activities and who can skim off the most from the reward pool?
I agree 100%. I am a minimalist when it comes to rules. This particular set of 'rules' is already too much for my liking. However, I am trying to draft something that an overwhelming majority of the community can get behind, and that will encourage growth and expansion of the tribe, rather than hinder it.
I am taking action because I think unfettered DVs can severely damage the community's growth potential. As soon as one person with high stake comes in and starts blasting DVs at every post he/she ideologically disagrees with, things will get ugly in a hurry, and a lot of good folks will leave rather than deal with it.
Again, I agree. Being able to experiment and do things differently is fundamental, imho. That is why I find the argument "free DVs are the only way to discipline and stop bad actors" non-persuasive. Let's explore creative ways to stop 'bad actors' that are less susceptible to abuse.