[SPS] Proposal for the agreement of the down-voting standards

proxy.token (54) in steemdao • 5 years ago (edited)

■ Proposal for the agreement of the down-voting standards

1. Overview

Down-voting activities have been increased after HF22 allowed free downvoting pools.
In STEEM blockchain, down-voting is a way of expressing negative opinions or disliking content, and can be used by anyone.
However, when there is no public consensus within the community on the standards of down-voting, down-voting can be perceived as a means of discrimination.
As one of the representatives for the South Korean Steem community, we take some down-voting cases very seriously because they are focusing on non-English postings, including Korean postings with unclear reasons.
These kinds of behaviors are not consistent with the #new-steem intent of "providing appropriate compensation for good content" or with the Steem blockchain ideology advocating censorless SNS.

Example 1: A post that has been down-voted due to the missing thumbnail image.
https://steempeak.com/kr/@jaydih/78plbz

Example 2: A post dealing with the loss of a friend, in sorrowful emotion, has been down-voted. It is very rude to down-vote a post with this type of content, rather than supporting a person that has lost someone close to them.
https://steempeak.com/zzan/@dodoim/24bfjn

Steem Blockchain is the space where members of different cultures and languages stay together.
If down-voting is a necessary means for a Steem-blockchain, we believe that the clear consensus among community members on the down-voting criteria is required. In addition, we think that down-voting activities beyond the agreed-upon criteria should be prohibited.
Based on this context, SCT community proposes the following down-voting criteria:

(1) Clear plagiarism
(2) Posting of personal attack against others
(3) Posting dissemination of false facts (fake news)
(4) Postings related to crime simulation and criminal activity
(5) Racist Posting

In addition to the down-voting criteria, we also propose implementing features that allow users to choose the reason for down-voting.

2. Implementation

Community developers can generate a reason-for-down-voting feature in PR and submit it to a public repository or submit a development proposal with the same content to the SPS.

3. How to Vote

4. Purpose of the Proposal

This proposal is created to record the community's opinion on down-voting criteria within the community in Steem-Blockchain as a consensus manner.

5. What Happens if this Proposal Gets Approved?

If this proposal has been approved, all Steem community members should try to follow these down-voting standards.

6. Proposers

Witness : @ayogom @proxy.token
Community(founder) : AAA(@triplea.reviews @virus707), ROR(@roadofrich), SAGODA(@sagoda @ksc), SCT(@sct @jack8831), ZZAN(@steemzzang @cjsdns)
Community CN : @deanliu @ericet @honoru
Community KR : @abdullar @ahnpeter @appletree0831 @aquabox @asd5710 @banguri @bizbenturer @bluengel @bulsik @cheolwoo-kim @corn113 @cyberrn @dakeshi @donekim @dorian-lee @dozam @eagleowl @enviro @epitt925 @feelsogood @fenrir78 @floridasnail @free.zzan @freegon @garamee21 @gfriend96 @gghite @glory7 @goodhello @happy-banguri @happyberrysboy @himapan @hodolbak @holic7 @honeybeerbear @hyokhyok @innovit @ioioioioi @isi3 @jacobyu @jeehun @jjy @joeypark @jsquare @jungch98 @jungjunghoon @kcc @kibumh @kingbit @kitalee @kiwifi @kopasi @kungdel @kwonjs77 @lonose @lovelyyeon @lucky2 @lucky2015 @machellin @minutebuddhism @naha @newbijohn @new-jersey @noisysky @onespringday @parisfoodhunter @parkname @pharm.steemit @philhyuntd @powerego @rainingfall @ramires @realmankwon @relaxkim @ryanhkr @sct.cu19 @sct.cu7 @seraphim502 @seunglimdaddy @skymin @skyoi @smongo @solar-junely @sonki999 @soosoo @tailcock @talkit @tiamo1 @tjayhas @tommycoin @tradingideas @trueimagine @twinpapa @ukk @uzgo @vip @wisdomandjustice @wonsama @ybc @ziq @zzan.blue @zzangu @zzings

steemdao steem proposal sps witness kr proxy new-steem

5 years ago by proxy.token (54)

$0.66

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!

Sort Order:

Trending

[-]

ethereumalist (51) · 5 years ago

Your points are valid. Many people on Steem are frustrated with the toxic environment caused by whimsical downvoting. Sadly, I don't believe your proposal is the right solution to the problem.

We need to remove the Proof of Brain reward system on Steem and make it an SMT thing exclusively. A universal voting system based off of stake-weight is centralization and control by the wealthy.

$0.83

3 votes

[-]

nutman (59) · 5 years ago

Is there / has there been a proposal to change the proof of brain reward system to prevent the centralization and control by the wealthy? Seems like one of Steem's biggest drawbacks. Or is SMT going to solve this? (I'm quite new here and trying to figure it all out!)

$0.00

[-]

ethereumalist (51) · 5 years ago

There are plenty of members that want to remove PoB from the STEEM currency and make its minting separate of any "reward pool" related to content. The problem is that different communities care about different types of content and should not have an impact on other communities.

SMTs can't solve this problem if STEEM remains PoB. This is because the STEEM currency will always be viewed as the "real" asset in the system unless it was made neutral by separating STEEM minting from the reward systems.

$0.15

1 vote

[-]

lordbutterfly (70) · 5 years ago

Great proposal.

I vote to ammend it a bit though.
Everyone should downvote what i say and when i say it.
I will be the arbiter of online justice and i will be fair.
From hence forth you shall call me....

Judge Judy.

$0.13

6 votes

[-]

abitcoinskeptic (73) · 5 years ago (edited)

With the exception of 1. Plagiarism ~ all other 4 ideas are based on different feelings and opinions and can be used to censor thought and ideas.

2~ personal insult/attack and 5~ racist are based on opinions and feelings which differ among cultures and people. Especially nationalism and politics.

3~ False information is often just a tactic used to argue something you disagree with true or not.
4~ Crime and criminal activity, examples vary between nation state for example some drugs are legalized in certain areas and in some countries you can have laws and states based on a religion.

$0.08

4 votes

[-]

adetorrent (74) · 5 years ago

So is this why @haejin / @ranchorelaxo / @dcommerce mainly downvotes "Non-Korean" content indiscriminately and upvotes Korean content almost exclusively? To "balance the score"?

The platform you are looking for already exists. It's called Facebook.

$0.06

1 vote

[-]

marki99 (54) · 5 years ago (edited)

Useless post. If an abuser wants to downvote someone, he’ll just select one of the reasons and downvote again.

$0.04

3 votes

[-]

jacobyu (76) · 5 years ago

By choosing a reason, most people may check again that a post is deserve to "downvote".

Any good idea is welcome for removing reasonless downvoting.

Thank you.

$0.00

[-]

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

Your tribes already disabled downvotes, so what's the problem?

Oh...it's always about the STEEM rewards. I get it.

$0.00

2 votes

[-]

proxy.token (54) · 5 years ago

Yeah, the Steem steill has that problem. That's why we ask Steem community for consensus now.

$0.00

[-]

marki99 (54) · 5 years ago

You could fix this with your SMT in the korean community. The only way to do that would be to remove downvotes completely though. Guidelines won’t help.

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.08

2 votes

[-]

inertia (73) · 5 years ago

I strongly disagree with the interpretation of “New Steem” as “providing appropriate compensation for good content.” With respect, how did you come up with that?

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

good content

As @steemzzang hands out $12 votes like candy.

$0.05

5 votes

[-]

jaguar.force (72) · 5 years ago

Can you at least get the newsteem tag right?

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

isnochys (66) · 5 years ago

Would this be a frontend or backend agreement?

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

Imaginary agreement.

$0.00

3 votes

[-]

joshman (70) · 5 years ago

A bit like herding cats aint it?

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

enforcer48 (68) · 5 years ago

I'd post examples like this https://steempeak.com/@naha/4swiw3

where they upvote stuff to kingdom come with zero regards to quality or even the content.

But, I value my sleep more.

But hey, it's totally discrimination.

$0.00

2 votes

[-]

joshman (70) · 5 years ago

They obviously want it to be a free for all so they can continue to gamify the reward system with their delegation bots and steem-engine tokens.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

isnochys (66) · 5 years ago

points to whaleshares
They could play over there..
;)

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

isnochys (66) · 5 years ago

Salmon agreement
!BEER

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

proxy.token (54) · 5 years ago

Thank u !

$0.00

[-]

beerlover (62) · 5 years ago

^{View or trade BEER.}

Hey @enforcer48, here is a little bit of BEER from @isnochys for you. Enjoy it!

$0.00

[-]

proxy.token (54) · 5 years ago

I drink you, beer ~ !

$0.00

[-]

preparedwombat (70) · 5 years ago

The only real problem with the SPS Proposal system is that it only lets you vote for a proposal. So, unfortunately, I am unable to vote against this terrible proposal.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

abojasim880 (2) · 5 years ago

it is ok

$0.00

[-]

abojasim880 (2) · 5 years ago

i dont know all thing about steemit

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

steemitboard (66) · 5 years ago

Congratulations @proxy.token! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You got more than 10 replies. Your next target is to reach 50 replies.

_{You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking}
_{If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP}

Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!

$0.00

[-]

abojasim880 (2) · 5 years ago

nice proposal

$0.00

[-]

witnessnews (2) · 5 years ago

This post has been resteemed by @witnessnews.

Follow @witnessnews to keep up with active witness updates.

$0.00

[-]

proxy.token (54) · 5 years ago

Thank you for your resteeming.

$0.00

[-]

abh12345 (76) · 5 years ago

Hi Salmon

Do the members/delegators get a say when you are picking proposals to support or not, including the return proposal?

$0.00

[-]

therealwolf (75) · 5 years ago

I do see the point you're trying to make with this proposal and I wrote quite a lot on this topic already:

Or to sum it up a bit: having a global rewards pool does require downvotes, but they're very much subjective and awful for the person receiving them. With your proposal, I don't think that everyone will actually take part in this agreement since there is no code which is enforcing people to abide by these rules. Nevertheless, I do think this is a serious problem.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

crypticat (70) · 5 years ago

What about people who are spamming, misusing tags and abusing reward pools? Will these activities get a pass under your proposal?

How are these activities not worse for Steem than Fake News of all things?

$0.00

[-]

nascimentoab (60) · 5 years ago

I had discussed about that on telegram Steem Network group and I'd received as response: "So there are nothing that we can do for that". So your point is a clear ansuare for that. Let's go forward. Great proposal.

$0.00

[-]

nutman (59) · 5 years ago

You can't police downvotes that's for sure. They are part of the platform for good reason, but like with anything can be abused. I think the main issue you have is that when you access steem via steempeak, the downvotes are really in-your-face. However if you access via steemit, you have to actually open up the list of votes to find the downvotes. It's a lot less obvious and most people probably won't even notice them. Therefore I think the issue you have is more to do with the way the downvotes are being displayed in steempeak. I share this opinion and have raised this concern with the steempeak team. They tend to agree and are looking to potentially change it - they are open to suggestions - visit them on discord: https://discord.gg/Fy3bca5

$0.00

[-]

treepi (64) · 5 years ago

(3) Posting dissemination of false facts (fake news)
(5) Racist Posting

Ummm... according to whom? You can't have subjective rules. If rules were in place they need to be completely objective. This is what gets you Facebook and YouTube censorship.

$0.00