![1000009845.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/moeknows/23wC7X7HU2YSUjus449eSVH2QdQNn4wRRcHzYur5s6fEMUfxqnjkiEEHiQfFZjeZKyMQC.png) *Preliminary/prototype logo designed in a scribble by me and edited & professionalized by @ravenmus1c via @opengenie. The 50 dots represent the 50 votes each individual would have under this system and when gathered around the diamond in the middle, forming a bit of a hexagon.* # White Paper: A New Reputation Voting System for the Hive Blockchain #### Project Summary Hive is a community of remarkable individuals, and this white paper unveils a reputation voting system that lets users curate the people who inspire them. Built on Hive’s pre-existing stake-based witness voting code, each account gains 50 reputation upvotes and 3 reputation downvotes to craft a vibrant, community-shaped reputation tapestry which truly reflects the quality of interactions between individuals. Self-voting is disabled, scores start with a welcoming baseline, and reputation flows from the net stake of votes (in Hive Power, HP). This system is about celebrating the human heartbeat of Hive, empowering users to lift up their peers, and weaving a network of trust and admiration. #### Introduction What if Hive’s reputation system wasn’t just about posts, but about people, the ones who make this blockchain a living, breathing community? This proposal invites users to curate the individuals they value most, turning reputation into a collective act of recognition. By adapting the witness voting framework, we create a stake-based system where every account starts with a small spark of reputation, and the community fans it into a flame. It's an opportunity to shine a light on Hive's finest, connect through shared appreciation, and let the people define the platform’s soul. #### Background **The Current Reputation System** Hive’s existing setup ties reputation to upvotes on posts or comments, weighted by HP, with a downvote option, effective only if the downvoter’s reputation score is higher than the target’s. It’s a start, but it’s post-focused, which creates a number of disadvantages. 1. Reputation tracks to content output, not a person’s full impact, but the two do not always align. For example, a person could be a Core developer for Hive yet rarely post, or if they post, it wouldn't necessarily be great content. 2. Users can boost their own reputation, sidestepping broad community input. Once high reputation scores are attained, there is no means to reflect a shift in behavior. 3. Often a downvote on content simply means a disagreement on rewards for that specific post and not an attack on the author's reputation. 4. Inactive troublemakers dodge accountability. For example, an account that undeservedly downvotes others (thus creating a negative interaction) yet makes no posts should still face some repercussions for their actions. 5. Exploitation is essentially incentivized. Those wishing to vote themselves into high reputation can do so by making multiple posts a day. With high enough stake, they can increase their reputation drastically before the community has a real chance to react. 6. Big stakeholders (“whales”) often get tapped to step in. This can feel like an unwanted duty thrust upon investors who simply want to hold and stake Hive. This proposal shifts the lens from posts to people, amplifying the community’s voice and creates a trend towards community consensus rather than a reliance on whales with big voices. **Witness Voting as a Foundation** Hive’s witness voting system - 30 stake-weighted votes per account, with stale vote removal and proxy options — grounds influence in **commitment**. It’s a ready-made springboard for a system that celebrates people over posts. ## Proposed Reputation Voting System Key Features **50 Reputation Upvotes:** Each account can send 50 upvotes to curate others’ reputations. Anthropologist Robin Dunbar’s work notes 50 as a sweet spot for meaningful social ties, ideal for honoring Hive’s standouts. Purpose: A generous canvas to paint a picture of who matters most **to each individual**. Alleviates the need to create a widely agreed upon algorithm based upon factors that *most* people feel are important. This will leave it up to the individual and creates a de facto consensus of the opinions of those who interact with any given account. 3 Reputation Downvotes: Each account gets 3 downvotes for rare moments of concern. Researcher Vidya Venkataramani observed people typically hold 1-3 rivalries, making this a light touch for balance with the ability to for accounts to redeem themselves. Purpose: A small nudge to keep curation honest, not harsh. This allows the community to rally and address behaviors that are widely perceived as harmful or otherwise undesirable. Deserving causes are likely to receive the support they need without the need to rely on whales who may not be interested in the cause. No Self-Voting: Self-votes are out, so reputation stays a gift from the community. Stake-Based Reputation Calculation: Every account kicks off with 10,000 HP (score of 1), a warm welcome that says, “You’re here, and that’s a start.” Keeping a stake based aspect adds another perk for staking Hive. The more you stake the more your voice lifts those you champion. This also discourages the creation of multiple accounts to game the reputation system. Reputation is calculated as: Reputation Score = [(Total HP of upvotes - Total HP of downvotes) + 10,000] / 10,000 Example: Start at 1. Add 50,000 HP in upvotes, subtract 30,000 HP in downvotes, and the net is 20,000 HP + 10,000 HP baseline = 30,000 HP, or a score of 3. Dividing by 10,000 keeps it simple and friendly. It's low enough that an upvote from a moderate holder of HP would result in a perceivable change to the recipient's reputation score. Retention of Core Mechanics: This system is largely already proven with the current witness voting system. So it will be pretty familiar to current users. Vote Limits: 50 upvotes and 3 downvotes set the stage. Stale Vote Removal: Votes fade if not refreshed, keeping it current and encouraging users to stay active. Proxy Voting: Delegate votes to trusted proxies for ease. Rationale for Design Choices 50 Upvotes: Robin Dunbar’s “50” reflects a natural circle of appreciation, perfect for curating Hive’s gems. 3 Downvotes: Vidya Venkataramani’s 1-3 rivalries keep negatives minimal, letting positivity shine. Starting Spark: A score of 1 (10,000 HP) greets every user with possibility, urging them to shine through connection. Stake-Based: HP roots curation in commitment, making it fair and fun. Benefits Reusing the witness voting mechanism results in an easy-to-implement solution with less learning curve than many other solutions. Curated Community: Reputation becomes a gallery of people, not just posts, showcasing Hive’s heart. Joyful Empowerment: Users get to champion their heroes and build their Hive, sparking bonds and pride. Light Balance: More upvotes than downvotes tilt toward celebration, with a gentle check for fairness. Growth Vibes: A low start invites users to ask, “How do I glow?”—answered by engaging positively. Staking Lift: HP-driven scores nudge users to stake which increases their power to do good, powering Hive’s future. Technical Implementation The system tweaks Hive’s existing witness voting code as follows: ``` Set MAX_VOTES_PER_ACCOUNT to 50 for upvotes. Add MAX_DOWNVOTES_PER_ACCOUNT = 3. Add a self-vote block: if voter == target, reject. Implement reputation formula: reputation = [(sum(HP_upvotes) - sum(HP_downvotes)) + 10000] / 10000. Rename old reputation formula to something more appropriate. Options: - Content Score - Upvotes Score - Rewards Score - Other community suggestions Effectively launches accounts with a 10,000 HP baseline. ``` Keep stake-weighting, stale vote logic, and proxy options. It’s a smooth fit with what’s already there. **Challenges and Considerations** Perceptions of Importance: Some users may not feel that the current system has an overall negative impact on Hive; Let the community chime in. Downvote Care: The 3 downvotes might stir small spats; a light HP threshold could calm that. New Vibes: Users might need time to embrace the shift; a slow roll could help. Tech Fit: Handling 50 upvotes and 3 downvotes per account needs a quick test run. Next Steps - Play out the numbers on current scores. - Toss it to Hive’s governance for a community vibe check. - Spin up a testnet to tune the dials. Conclusion This reputation voting system hands Hive users the brush to paint their community’s portrait—one where curating people is the star. It’s about lifting each other up, sharing admiration, and letting the crowd craft a reputation that sings. Built on Hive’s solid bones, it’s a fresh way to connect and celebrate. A little testing and community chatter will polish it, but the goal is bright: a Hive that’s all about its people. ![divider.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/moeknows/W3CGjLfu-PB8ro82ZpZP2DJYqWdv8SjVQiQasiEcGctw3Jrh4b5JpqYUgTm3bMaAQKgjWtSsnn3b9TsvbV9EpNLXJc5RX6T8SDCoUjyti368DBti1EBNyHR9Q.png) I'd like to acknowledge and give special thanks to @meno, @ecoinstant, @buttcoins and @hivetoday. They listened to this idea, encouraged me to share it and [spread the word to the community](https://peakd.com/jabbertalkie/@hivetoday/jabber-talkie-2). Such encouragement and support is the essence of Hive and represents the magic that happens here every day. They would surely get my vote.