You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Decentralized doesn't have to mean chaotic. A case for Hive communication.

in LeoFinance3 years ago
This is the first part of the system, the second one would be a system for expressing opinions in organize manners. Anybody could add a relevant topic or issue that would be voted later by all interested users, the outcome could be viewed in the two-way
-HP wise
-user count wise

I was thinking this exact thing earlier today. I understand the need for 'skin in the game' when it comes to reward distribution, but there needs to be some ability for a huge number of minnows to make a big impact. The challenge I guess deals with how to disincentivize the use of bots that could manipulate that process. I will defer to someone more technically savvy about how best to do that.

In the meantime, let's keep this dialogue moving forward!

Sort:  

Combating bots activity seems fairly easy using some sort of consensus model taking into consideration the reputation factor. Either minimal reputation required or model in which reputable users confirm no-bots activity. With the second option, trust is needed but since it's not decisive it would be clear if somebody stated the truth or just realized their own agenda.