[fro0116]

Not to diminish the technical accomplishment here, but that sounds like the very definition of tyranny of the majority.

Not to say that our current systems of manual moderation are perfect, but at least it's a step removed from mob rule, with recourse usually available if a video is wrongly flagged for simply expressing unpopular opinion.

If a video tries to express unpopular viewpoints at DTube, it would seem impossible for it to ever get listed again without waiting for the tides of public opinion to turn, which could take much longer if these kinds of moderation systems become prevalent and the majority could silence the voices of the minority so directly.

Decentralized moderation is a hard problem, and I don't claim to have a good solution myself, but I'd rather take centralized services over decentralized ones with moderation implemented as rule by majority with no recourse. That seems like a dangerously slippery slope towards dystopia.

[tCfD]

Especially if the majority are all named "sybil"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybil_attack

[skrowl]

Particularly with how popular it is to use bots to Facebook Like, Retweet Twitter, Upvote Reddit, etc. I'm a little worried about being hidden from search when you get too many downvotes, because I personally could probably create a downvote bot army in a day and I'm not really even that interested in it.

[lt]

On steem, your influence (the power of your downvote) is weighted by the amount of stake (the currency) you have, precisely for that reason.

Still tyranny of the majority (or of the influential stakeholders, actually), but it's a different issue.

[RossDCurrie]

Yeah, on Steem it doesn't take a whole bunch of people to disagree with your opinion... you just have to piss off one person who holds a ton of Steem ;)