RE: Request for Comments: Moving SPORTS to a linear curation curve
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I alluded to my opinions in the post but I'm also in agreement that moving to linear curation rewards is the right decision for now. That being said I still have concerns for future behaviors this may encourage.
My biggest fear is that the larger stakeholders may use their larger influence to block out smaller users from having a voice. Combined with 2.5 free downvotes, one of our top SPORTS whales could eliminate a lot of rewards pool competition by downvoting smaller accounts that get less rewards.
This could be counteracted by adopting a Blurt style system of no downvotes and allow the crowd to determine the top post while allowing stake to vote wherever it feels is best. This also has a load of negatives associated with it so for now I'm open to exploring linear as is to see if we run into any trouble and then address from there.
I think the best option to prevent a whale in SPORTS from a negative vote without reason is to make an agreement between the whales, that if someone will give a negative vote, leave a comment in the publication stating the reasons why they gave a negative vote. And if we see that the negative vote he gave is not valid then the other sports whales have to give negative votes to the whale that gave the negative vote for no apparent reason.