Viewing a response to: @themarkymark/re-scholarispob-qw1sb1
Christ almighty. I keep going back to what you said in discord some time ago about the number of fraud attempts that occur on Hive. This type of upvoting is just as bad. I appreciate your response, though. Have you written any posts related to this type of upvoting? Or, do you know anyone who has? I think I have an idea about what people talk about regarding "malicious downvoting", but I don't have a full picture yet so I can't speak to it at this time. --- <center><sub>Posted via [proofofbrain.io](https://www.proofofbrain.io/@scholaris.pob/qw1y1t)</sub></center>
| author | scholaris.pob |
|---|---|
| permlink | qw1y1t |
| category | proofofbrain |
| json_metadata | {"app":"proofofbrain/0.1","canonical_url":"https://www.proofofbrain.io/@scholaris.pob/qw1y1t"} |
| created | 2021-07-10 23:17:54 |
| last_update | 2021-07-10 23:17:54 |
| depth | 7 |
| children | 5 |
| last_payout | 2021-07-17 23:17:54 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| promoted | 0.000 HBD |
| body_length | 581 |
| author_reputation | 3,074,855,239,378 |
| root_title | "Curation at it's worst..." |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 104,845,220 |
| net_rshares | 527,003,493 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| amr008.pob | 0 | 527,003,493 | 25.78% |
I’ve written many posts about specific cases but not in the idea in general. It’s unavoidable, people will vote friends, many will vote using as little effort as possible, many will vote things that are ridiculous but it is something they believe in, very few will organically curate to the best of the ability. But if you think of it, what crypto requires you to spend 2-8 hours a day really mostly shit content to receive 10% at best reward for it? It’s expect that people in general will avoid doing that.
| author | themarkymark |
|---|---|
| permlink | re-scholarispob-qw1y91 |
| category | proofofbrain |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["proofofbrain"],"app":"peakd/2021.07.1"} |
| created | 2021-07-10 23:22:15 |
| last_update | 2021-07-10 23:22:15 |
| depth | 8 |
| children | 4 |
| last_payout | 2021-07-17 23:22:15 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.010 HBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.010 HBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| promoted | 0.000 HBD |
| body_length | 514 |
| author_reputation | 1,778,660,029,726,037 |
| root_title | "Curation at it's worst..." |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 104,845,264 |
| net_rshares | 41,369,124,882 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| craigcryptoking | 0 | 37,569,705,112 | 100% | ||
| scholaris.pob | 0 | 3,799,419,770 | 4% |
Great points as usual, but what is high quality? How can I adjust my curation to meet that requirement? I vote on posts that meet some requirements. How can I gauge what I grade against what the rest of the community sees as adequate? I think OCD has a good platform. I remember a post that one of their curators made. I'll check them for specifics unless other options are available. --- <center><sub>Posted via [proofofbrain.io](https://www.proofofbrain.io/@scholaris.pob/qw20d5)</sub></center>
| author | scholaris.pob |
|---|---|
| permlink | qw20d5 |
| category | proofofbrain |
| json_metadata | {"app":"proofofbrain/0.1","canonical_url":"https://www.proofofbrain.io/@scholaris.pob/qw20d5"} |
| created | 2021-07-11 00:07:54 |
| last_update | 2021-07-11 00:07:54 |
| depth | 9 |
| children | 3 |
| last_payout | 2021-07-18 00:07:54 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| promoted | 0.000 HBD |
| body_length | 508 |
| author_reputation | 3,074,855,239,378 |
| root_title | "Curation at it's worst..." |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 104,845,675 |
| net_rshares | 0 |
> Great points as usual, but what is high quality? Quality is subjective but I think we can all agree we don’t need any more pictures of flowers from someone’s backyard for $100+. > I vote on posts that meet some requirements. That’s probably more than 50-80% of the voters. > I think OCD has a good platform. Anytime manual curation is used it usually will be better. This isn’t always the case as most of the delegation projects in the past have been abused. After hard fork 25, there is no need to delegate anymore as you can just follow without penalties now. There is no perfect solution, my point is simply these “malicious downvotes” are extremely rare and poor upvotes are exponentially more common, yet the focus is to create laws to force users to vote in a centralized fashion or have their rewards stolen. I hope after they do this they put one in telling people how to upvote that is acceptable as well.
| author | themarkymark |
|---|---|
| permlink | re-scholarispob-qw20xq |
| category | proofofbrain |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["proofofbrain"],"app":"peakd/2021.07.1"} |
| created | 2021-07-11 00:20:15 |
| last_update | 2021-07-11 00:20:15 |
| depth | 10 |
| children | 2 |
| last_payout | 2021-07-18 00:20:15 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.028 HBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.028 HBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| promoted | 0.000 HBD |
| body_length | 929 |
| author_reputation | 1,778,660,029,726,037 |
| root_title | "Curation at it's worst..." |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 104,845,784 |
| net_rshares | 111,574,274,369 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| erh.germany | 0 | 107,854,326,688 | 100% | ||
| scholaris.pob | 0 | 3,719,947,681 | 4% |
hiveblocks