My point in bringing in the old post was just this situation isn't new and has always happened.
I completely agree that both the downvoter and the downvoted often name-call, smear, and escalate the conflict, and say unnecessary things without merit about the other. Many people it seems could benefit from taking a conflict resolution course.
At the end of the day all systems and platforms have pros and cons and DPOS means stake is the tie-breaker in any conflict regardless of who is right and wrong, who uses nice words, etc.
In many cases diplomacy would go a long way, but this is a weakness of DPOS in general. Having the most stake is a fine tie-breaker, but stake doesn't take skill sets into account. In another setting an organization might put their most diplomatic people on the front line of moderation, their best business minds at the top of the project, etc.
I understand DPOS, I think it is imperfect, but all systems have strengths and weaknesses. There is kind of a perfect balance in knowing what the tie breaker is.
The POB group is looking to experiment with other methods of moderation and I find it interesting, but I also don't feel attracted to having a complicated set of rules. It is what it is, and after 1000 debates, it still will be tomorrow.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
The "adults" should implement a decentralized jury system.
ALGORAND implements a dispute resolution system where any transaction (post) can only be disputed (flagged) once, and when a transaction is disputed, 1000 random users are notified and if they fail to respond within a set time frame (say, 48 hours) their option is forfeit and it goes to another random user. A transaction can only be canceled (removed) if a 60% consensus is reached by the randomized jury. If there is no 60% consensus (even if it's a 599 to 401 split) then the transaction remains unaffected. There is no penalty for simply being disputed, there is no "held pending trial" status. There is a small incentive paid to jury members for their participation and there is an added bonus for voting with the majority if there is a 60% majority (and the votes are hidden from all participants until voting is completed).
LOL. Yes. Maybe they should write a Hive tutorial about that too? And of course it takes two to tango. I do not discount that fact.
I'll leave the platform politics part up to you folks. That's for you folks to sit and talk about. Maybe someday it'll actually lead to something productive. I'm sure that's the goal.
And yes I can see this is a bit of a POB advertisement. I've seen this approach a couple times already. I hope it gets clicks.
Also, pardon me. I'm just being facetious for shits and giggles.