I have come to believe that transparency regarding individual user behaviour - what happens in their wallet - is more of a curse than a blessing. The fact that you can see when everyone is powering down or powering up seems to be more counterproductive than productive. Seeing the transactions and movements of individuals in terms of their voting and transaction behaviour then becomes the main topic to talk/argue/fight about. What if that would change?

Basically, I assume that there would be less conflict if one could not see the usernames that votes assign, but everything remained anonymous. Why? Because you think you "know" the people who upvote or downvote you, but in reality they are just names and figures to whom I have no particular relationship, only an indeterminate one.

Unless I refer to facts such as access numbers of my content, how many eyes have seen my content, the dwell time and whether they come from internally or externally. Any information beyond that, such as the amount of reward someone has determined for me, already influences my own behaviour.

I think it's a funny - unserious - idea to give out the payout amount only as a total, but not who specifically the votes come from and not how much from the single voters. Any form of ingratiating oneself as well as fighting caustically would then be impossible, because one would not know with whom one would be on good or bad terms. The user would be left to his own devices and would only know how his content was received by the audience on the basis of objective figures. Whereby one would make it transparent, for example, that 10 users voted with 50 percent, 6 users with 100 percent, 30 users with 60 percent, etc.

LOL

I know, this is silly and it probably would also not avoid conflicts but I would like to know what effect this would actually have. HaHa! Though I am in favor of conflicts as far as they teach me something (which they most likely always do).