Hello @Narrative Network Team

Voting for the niches is becoming quite time consuming especially if we want to leave informative comments for any downvotes, or a controversial upvote.  And yet the community must do this in order for the platform to work.

1) This may already be the case, but in case it isn't, I propose that the voting activity from the outset of the Chaucer Alpha be taken into account in the initial reputation scoring when the platform launches.  This way the people putting in all this effort to enable this very manual process will be getting something out of their community service, and you'll be more likely to have sufficient voters as the niche proposals multiply.  

The scoring could in some shape or form reward in reputation for each vote that ends up being the correct vote (matching the ultimate decision on the niche, whether by vote validation or Tribunal), and slightly penalise if it goes against the ultimate decision for the niche.

This in turn motivates people to study how the community is deciding on these niches, and for everyone to hone their sense of what makes a good niche with a good description.

(As an aside, I also think the community ranking currently in place should be taken into account in the initial reputation as well - to what degree is best determined by the Team, but it would not be right to completely disregard it).

2) I think it is worth the Team considering each vote being made up of two yes or no answers, one for the niche title and another for the niche description.  There have been many cases already of niches with great titles, and terrible descriptions.  It would be far more efficient if in one single step, the community pronounced itself twice - on the title, and the description.  This way, a niche with a good title does not get rejected, but a bad title can be.  This then leaves the niche in need of a title revision, but otherwise approved?

Thoughts?

Original Post

I agree with a lot of what you are saying @Malkazoid , if I down vote a niche, I certainly want to give the creator a reason why which of course takes time. I also worry that when the volume of niche's increases I may simply miss a good niche and not give a vote to it. I think the idea of rewarding those taking the time to vote and thus putting the effort in is a good one. I also think having a scoring system also is good although I'm not sure of penalising those users that vote against the ultimate decision although can see why you would want to deter people down voting a niche incorrectly/purposely.

Thank you for posting this @Malkazoid I intended to post a similar post, but wanted to wait until my niche selection was done.

I think the time invested for voting must be counted towards ones community reputation. If you spend time pitching in to build all the houses in a community, you should get recognition for doing so. 

Following the same analogy...if you show up to build those houses and you don't know what you are doing, or worse yet have malicious intent, which results in making other people have to fix mistakes, then there should be some kind of accountability there too. (ie...voting with emotion that leads to a tribunal decision)

I have growing concerns, that as another member  and I briefly discussed on Telegram, that when Steemit started, the presence of cabals quickly emerged, making it difficult for others to get footholds.  I am not saying with certainty that this is happening here, but it is peculiar that quite a few of the same people are voting down the same things, which are clearly are not redundant. 

I think we should have community accountability in the form of reputation the discourages this behavior.

Likewise I see the potential for voter trolling to develop. I would like to believe that this would not happen...but I do live in the real world and operate on the internet...so yes, I believe it pretty much will. 

Another idea I had for speeding up the voting process when you wanted to leave a comment perhaps would be have a multiple choice of boiler plate reason why you up\down vote (duplicate, not inappropriate etc.) or more vote button rather than Yes/No, e.g. No Duplicate, No Inappropriate etc.

Dr. Rick posted:

Another idea I had for speeding up the voting process when you wanted to leave a comment perhaps would be have a multiple choice of boiler plate reason why you up\down vote (duplicate, not inappropriate etc.) or more vote button rather than Yes/No, e.g. No Duplicate, No Inappropriate etc.

Maybe just 

No --dupicate of "fill in the blank"

No--offensive to the community

Emily Barnett posted:
Dr. Rick posted:

Another idea I had for speeding up the voting process when you wanted to leave a comment perhaps would be have a multiple choice of boiler plate reason why you up\down vote (duplicate, not inappropriate etc.) or more vote button rather than Yes/No, e.g. No Duplicate, No Inappropriate etc.

Maybe just 

No --dupicate of "fill in the blank"

No--offensive to the community

Yes that works for me. Perhaps also ...

No - other "fill in blank" too ?

An update here, for anyone who comes to this thread looking for answers on its subject matter.  The @Narrative Network Team have shed some light on this in another thread.  The post is here:

https://community.narrative.ne...21#11588447966872621

The summary is that there is some form of tracking of Chaucer activity that translates into reputation.

The bad news is, the team doesn't think posts to this discussion forum should be reflected in any way in your reputation when the platform launches.  Now is the time to speak up if you feel that is not right.  The thread:

https://community.narrative.ne...tion-going-up-or-not

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×