The ocdb downvotes aren't there just because posts reach a too high amount, it's to discourage voting the same people over and over like some have been doing with the keys to a bigger account (rancho) and at the same time landing on the same people farming autovotes with mediocre content getting those bigger votes cause they happen to be trending due to said autovotes. We've mainly ignored users who got the bigger votes for the first time and if it was on decent content or those who don't seem to be fishing for them constantly. When I have the time to start posting more often I'm sure I'm going to downvote myself again due to the autovotes on content I don't feel took a lot of my time or effort but at the same time I haven't been getting those rancho votes that I'm mainly targeting atm. You can also establish that I'm not farming autovotes when my last post was 3 weeks ago.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Is there a goal to make it so rancho gets no rewards at all? I'm curious as to the strategy behind that account.
I previously made a few statements that changing to 50/50 whales would just upvote whoever instead of themselves and make good money. Now under 50/50 we see if you wanted to reduce the money said whale/s are making you would have to then downvote dozens to hundreds of people who have nothing to do with said whale/s. I find that to be a PR problem because now a bunch of people who have never been downvoted are getting hit, in their mind it's a pretty bad experience. I understand the reward pool and all that stuff about disagreement of rewards, but most people do not share that value. One of the biggest downsides to 50/50 is that you have to now downvote a lot of random people instead of the vote abuser who is upvoting himself.
I don't like 50/50 for that reason and many others.
That's not possible unless he's voting for his own account or accounts with no upvotes at all, in that case if the content is decent and the author behind it isn't just farming I wouldn't be for downvoting that. The issue is he's just voting with a big account whatever is on trending at the time and a lot of those accounts are already getting there from unfair autovotes from other big accounts, if people don't like the downvotes but never mind the big autovotes they get then it's a good first learning experience that pending rewards means pending for a reason. There's many who still see downvotes the wrong way and somehow completely forget that on youtube or reddit where downvotes similarly remove some visibility and potential rewards but get loud here just cause the downvotes are public and can be tracked who's casting them but it doesn't make it right that they should be able to complain. I'm all for fair upvotes and at the same time fair downvotes so I do take the time to explain and justify them, like now, but I also respect people who don't want to justify them the same way they're not justifying their upvotes and if they're being used in a bad way it's easy to counter them as there's a lot more upvote mana than downvote one and that's up to all of us to make sure people aren't being targeted by "bad" downvotes such as personal, retaliation, etc.
Good thoughts on this topic. I am manually curating with the informationwar and deepdives curation trail now. I think we might have a total of 2million HP following the trail in total(ppl following on hive.vote and some have their own follow).
Is there a place where all the curation groups talk about curation topics? A discord to chat about this kinda thing? Now that I have more power backing what I upvote I was thinking I need to see what other big curation groups are doing/maybe work together to see what best practices are/strategy/etc.
Appreciate your time :)