Why We Don't Have an Open Reputation System for the Internet

In the discussion group example, the reputation of contributing good primary content might be different from reputation for resolving heated disputes, for example, and would be tracked in a separate instance of the reputation system. For example, if the desired average Reputation Score is 100 in a system with 1000 Actors, if the monthly decay reduced the sum of all Reputation Scores by 1000, 10 new Actors joined over the month, and 1000 Rating Tokens were eliminated because of the cap, 3000 new Rating Tokens (or something like that, my math may be off – sorry) would be distributed, proportional to their then-current Reputation Scores, to all Actors. Context: We never built an open reputation system for the internet. If there is more than one reputation subject we care about, there will be an instance of the reputation system for each subject, even if it covers the same Actors. • The reputation system manages two numbers for each Actor, called the Reputation Score S, and the Rating Tokens Balance R. It does this in a way that it is impossible for those numbers to be changed outside of this protocol. • Let’s call the participants in the reputation system Actors. • The overall number of new Ratings Tokens that is injected into the system on a regular basis as replenishment is determined as a function of the desired average Reputation Score of Actors in the system. • This system does not distinguish reputation on the desired value (like posting good content) vs reputation in rating other Actors (e.g. (). Continue reading.

Related Hacker News news

You may also be interested in North Korea Chevrolet Emergency Bing Doge Bitcoin Airbnb Fisa