The idea is to minimize the amount and effectiveness of gaming, not eliminate it entirely. Just going at literal self-voting is very ineffective at limiting anything. The approach needs to be a bit better than that, even if perfection is still unachievable.
Obviously self voting is not the only issue being discussed here. It just happens to be the one I focused on because I had thoughts on a solution to that particular problem. This is just my small contribution to the conversation at hand.
The whole point to implementing the RC system was to reduce spam and gaming the reward pool and is a good example of a solution that did some to minimize gaming while being far from perfect. The poorly thought out implementation of HF20 hurt a lot of initiatives and smaller accounts. I just don't want to see that happen again with a whole new barrage of changes this time around.
I feel this is a horrible misunderstanding of financial incentives. We should take advantage of gaming, not seek to reduce it. Water flows downhill, and we should profit from that, like hydropower. Trying to limit gamers impact is like pumping water uphill. It's a losing game.
We have misaligned incentives, and can replace them entirely with appropriately aligned incentives that encourage development and promote capital gains, rather than seek to reduce incentives.
Any change implemented can be gamed to some extent. I just dont want to see quality content creators being punished for others greedy behavior..
The idea is to minimize the amount and effectiveness of gaming, not eliminate it entirely. Just going at literal self-voting is very ineffective at limiting anything. The approach needs to be a bit better than that, even if perfection is still unachievable.
Obviously self voting is not the only issue being discussed here. It just happens to be the one I focused on because I had thoughts on a solution to that particular problem. This is just my small contribution to the conversation at hand.
The whole point to implementing the RC system was to reduce spam and gaming the reward pool and is a good example of a solution that did some to minimize gaming while being far from perfect. The poorly thought out implementation of HF20 hurt a lot of initiatives and smaller accounts. I just don't want to see that happen again with a whole new barrage of changes this time around.
I feel this is a horrible misunderstanding of financial incentives. We should take advantage of gaming, not seek to reduce it. Water flows downhill, and we should profit from that, like hydropower. Trying to limit gamers impact is like pumping water uphill. It's a losing game.
We have misaligned incentives, and can replace them entirely with appropriately aligned incentives that encourage development and promote capital gains, rather than seek to reduce incentives.
I flag trash. You have received a flag.