create account

RE: People Rank - Using Page Rank Algorithm for Better Curation and Rewards by mrosenquist

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com

Viewing a response to: @dantheman/people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards

· @mrosenquist ·
$2.25
@dantheman I like you are recognizing the shortcomings of the current system (which is already darn impressive) and are willing to consider changing things for a  more strategically valuable and sustainable system.  I do have some concerns with the model you propose, but also have some ideas which may be worthy to evaluate.

The model you are recommending will create a distributed tree for whales to empower others to share in the distribution of rewards.  The biggest and most un-resolvable problem will be in the inherent structure it will establish, which will be reinforced by expected self-serving behaviors.  Not all will fall into this pit, but the system will definitely support it.  

This model, as I think your describe it, basically sets in motion the creation of dynasty's, where the whale/Emperor empowers a second class who will always be loyal and the wealth will continue to remain mostly within these selective circles as the acts of self-interest will continue without barriers.  In fact, in a worst case scenario, can you imagine a situation where whales connect to other whales and the power distribution remains very flat and within a relatively small group.  There is no real motivation to vote outside the elite community as part of this system thus propagating classes with a great divide.  I think in this system, the poor will continue to struggle for the outlaying scraps.  

If the goals of change are:
1. Retain the value principle and current structures of Steem Power as a mechanism of 'mass' to move rewards
2. Encourage a steady stream of good content creation by ever more of the community
3. Identify and reward the best of the content, regardless of topic, author, or self-interest reward
4. Identify people as domain experts, trustworthy, and valuable contributors as part of a reputation system
5. Not overly burden the system with new complexities or new measures of value
6. Promote active and regular participation by all Steemit members (reading, voting, etc.) but not allow for dilution via too many votes by bots or mass-voting tactics.  I.e. vote power controls must remain in place.
7. Give no advantage to those who would create multiple accounts to vote.  Kill-off new accounts, after a period of time, that do not contribute to content. (unused accounts or accounts just used as part of an upvote bot-army)
8. Empower all accounts in good standing (even new accounts) to have some measurable meaning to voting and participation in a system which rewards good behaviors (the act of just voting) with more weight (outside of the SP and SD system - don't want to muck with that if at all possible) that users can witness benefits to their participation
9.   Tie downvoting to expertise of the voter and provide automated specific weights as to the reason
10. Empower whales to more easily facilitate and oversee dispersion of their influence to trusted parties (ie. like @smooth) and give them the ability to designate topic experts
11. Make allocation of steem power a voter-controlled variable to facilitate scale-ability of up-votes (from minnows to whales) Ex. so whales don't have to upvote hundreds every day to disperse their value to the system.

If these are the goals you are working towards, I think I might have an structure which will achieve these while making Steemit more extensible,  user-friendly, and sustainable over time with respect to handling more content in a better organized and curated manner.  

It boils down to using the current factors you already have (SP, Reputation, Vote Power), which don't need to fundamentally change in any way.  The key will be using SP like 'mass', Vote Power like 'speed' and Reputation like 'direction' to create a model where Vectors are aligning to good content.  Such model does allow minnows to pool for a collective vote which rivals whales, but at a cost of limiting the number of votes.  A set of swim-lanes become a forcing function for better dispersion among the topic categories.  Upvotes tie to reputation of categories which then power the weighting of down-votes.

...Okay, I will hold there without getting into the details or mechanics.  If you are interested I can create a separate post and elaborate.  I think it is doable without cratering the system or forcing a major redesign.  Let me know if you find my ramblings interesting and I can create a presentation, video, something, to outline the changes I have drawn sloppily on my whiteboard.

http://i.giphy.com/DRR4dvJqQ1xjG.gif
👍  , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authormrosenquist
permlinkre-dantheman-people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards-20160811t041355797z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["dantheman","smooth"],"image":["http://i.giphy.com/DRR4dvJqQ1xjG.gif"]}
created2016-08-11 04:14:00
last_update2016-08-11 04:14:00
depth1
children7
last_payout2016-09-10 19:32:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.698 HBD
curator_payout_value0.555 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length4,511
author_reputation178,405,687,597,634
root_title"People Rank - Using Page Rank Algorithm for Better Curation and Rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id739,499
net_rshares2,083,549,350,446
author_curate_reward""
vote details (12)
@anonymint · (edited)
> he biggest and most un-resolvable problem will be in the inherent structure it will establish, which will be reinforced by expected self-serving behaviors....

> This model, as I think your describe it, basically sets in motion the creation of dynasty's

I am not sure if it is the biggest vulnerability, as I explained another one in my comments, but I agree this could be a degenerate outcome. Afaics, we would incentivize a top-down rigid structure, which I also mentioned in my longish comment post.

Btw, I didn't upvote for your algorithm suggestion, which sounds to me like probably not correct.
properties (22)
authoranonymint
permlinkre-mrosenquist-re-dantheman-people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards-20160811t065911879z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-08-11 06:59:06
last_update2016-08-11 07:02:36
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-09-10 19:32:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length604
author_reputation28,085,935,540,836
root_title"People Rank - Using Page Rank Algorithm for Better Curation and Rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id741,192
net_rshares0
@mrosenquist ·
In all fairness, I have yet to outline the application of any algorithm.  I was just validating the goals and limiting parameters to the problem (technical, behavioral, and process).  If you really want to know how I think the system can be modified to attain all the goals I stated (assumed), let me know.  I can produce a strategic framework for review.

...and don't worry about not upvoting.  Only vote for things you respect or agree with.  :)
properties (22)
authormrosenquist
permlinkre-anonymint-re-mrosenquist-re-dantheman-people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards-20160811t075438689z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-08-11 07:54:42
last_update2016-08-11 07:54:42
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-09-10 19:32:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length448
author_reputation178,405,687,597,634
root_title"People Rank - Using Page Rank Algorithm for Better Curation and Rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id741,672
net_rshares0
@anonymint ·
I did upvote. I just meant my upvote was for the part I responded to. Thanks.
properties (22)
authoranonymint
permlinkre-mrosenquist-re-anonymint-re-mrosenquist-re-dantheman-people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards-20160811t100724628z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-08-11 10:07:18
last_update2016-08-11 10:07:18
depth4
children0
last_payout2016-09-10 19:32:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length77
author_reputation28,085,935,540,836
root_title"People Rank - Using Page Rank Algorithm for Better Curation and Rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id742,800
net_rshares0
@blakemiles84 ·
Pics or the whiteboard didn't happen.

https://www.steemimg.com/images/2016/08/11/peer-reviewf407e.jpg
properties (22)
authorblakemiles84
permlinkre-mrosenquist-re-dantheman-people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards-20160811t053056202z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"image":["https://www.steemimg.com/images/2016/08/11/peer-reviewf407e.jpg"]}
created2016-08-11 05:30:57
last_update2016-08-11 05:30:57
depth2
children3
last_payout2016-09-10 19:32:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length102
author_reputation51,861,865,663,185
root_title"People Rank - Using Page Rank Algorithm for Better Curation and Rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id740,388
net_rshares0
@mrosenquist ·
$0.23
Yes, I didn't take a picture of it as, well, it is just plain messy.  I have lots of different thing co-mingled, but it makes sense to me.  I can clean it up, put it in a powerpoint presentation if people are interested.  For right now I will sleep on it and see if I can poke holes in what I am thinking.  

Honestly, I didn't think anyone would read my post.  It makes sense to my eyes as I was scribbling in 4 colors.  I was just doing it as an intellectual exercise then writing it up to get it out of my head.  Speak up if anyone wants to see my ideas.  I think I can hit all those goals I stated, but peer review is really the litmus test.
👍  
properties (23)
authormrosenquist
permlinkre-blakemiles84-re-mrosenquist-re-dantheman-people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards-20160811t074728715z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-08-11 07:47:33
last_update2016-08-11 07:47:33
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-09-10 19:32:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.176 HBD
curator_payout_value0.057 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length645
author_reputation178,405,687,597,634
root_title"People Rank - Using Page Rank Algorithm for Better Curation and Rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id741,612
net_rshares306,787,253,075
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@blakemiles84 ·
I'm about to start scanning and posting some of my concepts. What the hell? Maybe it could help spur ideas elsewhere or bootstrap a project totally.
properties (22)
authorblakemiles84
permlinkre-mrosenquist-re-blakemiles84-re-mrosenquist-re-dantheman-people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards-20160811t173554436z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"]}
created2016-08-11 17:35:54
last_update2016-08-11 17:35:54
depth4
children1
last_payout2016-09-10 19:32:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length148
author_reputation51,861,865,663,185
root_title"People Rank - Using Page Rank Algorithm for Better Curation and Rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id749,077
net_rshares0