There's no good reason to be abusive with downvotes. That's why I was leaning more towards muting the ability for an account to downvote temporarily, provided the community agreed to the proposal highlighting the issue with the account. The abusive account would still be able to function normally, just can't downvote until their time is served. Downvote jail LOL!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yea, as I was writing this post, at midnight, it got to the point of no return, it was either needed to be cut short, or I'd have to push on and make it a full book. I do find value in giving power to the community to be flexible. We vote in our witnesses; they have a lot of features to fiddle with. We have the DAO; people can vote there for the direction of the DAO funds. Could we extend this even further to PoB? Interesting concept for sure.
I thought my recent was long at about 1200 less words, yet I probably could have wrote 5000 more. I know the feeling.
And when it comes to giving or taking away in a world like what's being created here, the more minds in on the decisions, the better. The more straightforward of an approach that removes the canvassing, politicking, drumming up support, etc.; the better. That's why I like that proposal system. The option is simply there, and those wishing to take part can simply do it without being pressured. You wouldn't see the abusive types who enjoy harassing others succeeding in getting downvotes muted by being pushy; just like don't see folks asking for development funds trying to get them by being pushy. But I'm not trying to sell this idea. Just thinking about it openly. Already wrote a book on it, stashed away in some random comment section out there.