You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: REJECTED: Formal Proposal for Rules Governing Downvoting within the “Proof of Brain” Tribe

@themarkymark, I greatly respect your opinion. Clearly we disagree on this issue.

Tribe activity and investment is an individual opt-in / opt-out decision. I, personally, do not care to be heavily invested in a tribe where folks can accumulate massive amounts of the tribe's token and then use that stake to downvote ideas (or people) they don't like into oblivion.

As such, this is a policy that will determine whether or not I remain an active member of this tribe. If it is voted down with no hope of a suitable alternative, then I will focus my efforts elsewhere.

Others may have the opposite perspective (i.e. they perceive this policy as "dictating how people should vote" and thus choose to not be a part of the tribe). As such, they are free to start or join a tribe that espouses their particular views (as am I, if this turns out contrary to my desires).


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Sort:  

I, personally, do not care to be heavily invested in a tribe where folks can accumulate massive amounts of the tribe's token and then use that stake to downvote ideas (or people) they don't like into oblivion.

Has this actually happened though?

I really don’t think someone with 400 PoB is any threat especially when the owner has well over 100K and many others are up there as well.

I really doubt anyone has the power to downvote anyone on PoB to oblivion as many others can easily step up and counter it if they so choose. The problem is most people choose not to.

Anyway, I have no horse in this race so it doesn’t matter what I think.

Yes it is happening right now...

What I love about this debate is that the Hive Tribes system allows a different set of community rules about an issue (ie downvoting) to be adopted to that which applies on the Hive main chain.

I think that both @themarkymark and @trostparadox have valid and well thought out views on this important issue.

By having both options it both gives users choice and lets the market decide which they prefer.

In this case I think that both will be winners as consumer preference is varied on this issue.

Hive is so powerful!

By having both options it both gives users choice and lets the market decide which they prefer.

Absolutely!

And different tribes can adopt different approaches.

This is exactly why centralized governance at the tribe level does not bother me. The decentralization happens at the 'consumer' level.

If I don't like the way the 'tribe CEO' is running things, I can invest my time and treasure in a different tribe -- I vote with my sneakers!

And not only that -- if I disagree with the way all the other tribes are being managed and if I'm an adventurous sort, I can go out and create my own tribe.