# Cred Rebalancing: A Props-Oriented "CredSpective"

**URL:** <https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/cred-rebalancing-a-props-oriented-credspective/1030>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Created:** [January 20, 2021, 4:16am UTC](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/cred-rebalancing-a-props-oriented-credspective/1030 "2021-01-20T04:16:59Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 37

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Beanow](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex032/user_avatar/discourse.sourcecred.io/beanow/32/98_2.png) [@Beanow](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/Beanow)\
**Post date:** [February 3, 2021, 8:49pm UTC](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/cred-rebalancing-a-props-oriented-credspective/1030/37 "2021-02-03T20:49:44Z")

</div>

> [@decentralion](#):
>
> Feel free to make a separate thread proposing this change, along with the analysis and rationale. If it gets broad buy-in from the community I’ll look favorably on ratifying it.

Respectfully, I don’t think that’s an appropriate followup.

From a TBD role a change has been proposed, feedback was requested, and by TBD privilege it has been implemented. Responding to that, I’m asking for clarifications and expressing concerns.

Rallying support for an alternative is a last resort measure should I’ve lost confidence and feel the need to try and overrule or bypass a TBD choice. _I don’t see reason to do that._ I have faith it’s all in good confidence and there’s time to discuss.

Besides, I feel like my other questions wouldn’t be heard if I moved _just_ my alternative idea to a new thread, while they’re perfectly on topic here :]

* * *

As such I’ll repeat and summarize my previous position.

I think this is a _heavy_ change including:

- Disproportional recency bias.
- Parameters I can’t explain (such as 5k per plugin when it doesn’t saturate the cap).
- Great concerns about gatekeeping, centralization and bottlenecks.
- Risk of excluding a new group.

But primarily the increased weights for higher social roles are concerning to me.

An irony I hadn’t pointed out yet:

> [@decentralion](#):
>
> The simple answer is that the coders are the ones with the power to modify and change the system. If coders are uncomfortable, they can directly build something better. Frankly, it’s good if devs are uncomfortable when the system doesn’t work. This is the essence of dogfooding. This is the path by which we genuinely build a system that works better for everyone.

Besides dogfooding, this is about power dynamics. Those who already have superpowers shouldn’t also have a Cred advantage. But we’re giving the roles such as core who have a different set of superpowers an extra Cred advantage in the same PR?

- Why wouldn’t this cause the same issue all over again?
- Are we preemptively doing this or has an actual Sybil / Eternal Summer issue occurred?
- Are increased authority and moderation options not sufficient in our near-term [trust level](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/trust-levels/490)?
- Do you think the 1x-2x-3x role weights had the urgency to need including in this change or could it have been discussed more.

I’ll stop myself there for the moment.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/cred-rebalancing-a-props-oriented-credspective/1030)._