Incentive-based crowdvoting using a blockchain

1. A method, comprising:

creating, via a computer-implemented moderator, a smart contract identifying content provided by a source and identifying review requirements for performing a review of the content via one or more reviewers, a size of the smart contract variably based on a moderator controlled complexity of a mathematical calculation required to mine the smart contract;

signing and validating, via the computer-implemented moderator, the smart contract;

communicating, via the computer-implemented moderator, the smart contract to the source to be stored in a blockchain for reviewing via the one or more reviewers;

receiving, via the computer-implemented moderator, information regarding a review of the content by the one or more reviewers;

generating, via the computer-implemented moderator, one or more vote contracts corresponding to the one or more users, the one or more vote contracts specifying a cost to the one or more reviewers to mine the corresponding one or more vote contracts to provide feedback on the content to the blockchain, the cost being based on the size of the smart contract;

providing, via the computer-implemented moderator, the one or more vote contracts to the corresponding one or more users for mining by the one or more reviewers to store the feedback on the blockchain; and

forwarding, via the computer-implemented moderator, compensation from the source to the one or more reviewers based on the review requirements for performing a review of the smart contract being met by the one or more reviewers.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the review requirements for performing the review of the content comprise:

one or more of a sensitivity level of the content, a number of reviewers needed to perform the review, and minimum time or maximum time needed to perform the content review.

3. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

confirming the review of the content is complete; and

confirming the review requirements were followed when the content was reviewed.

4. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

determining an average vote requirement based on a number of reviewers affiliated with the blockchain; and

determining a minimum number of the reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement.

5. The method of claim 4 , wherein the minimum number of reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement is based on one or more of a sensitivity level of the content and a time limit to complete the review.

6. The method of claim 4 , further comprising:

storing the minimum number of the reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement in the smart contract.

7. An apparatus, comprising:

a computer-implemented moderator in communication with a content source, a blockchain, and one or more content reviewers, the computer-implemented moderator configured to:

create a smart contract that identifies content provided by the source and identifies review requirements to perform a review of the content via the one or more reviewers, a size of the smart contract variably based on a moderator controlled complexity of a mathematical calculation required to mine the smart contract;

sign and validate the smart contract;

communicate the smart contract to the source to be stored in the blockchain for review via the one or more reviewers;

receive information regarding a review of the content by the one or more reviewers;

generate one or more vote contracts corresponding to the one or more users, the one or more vote contracts specifying a cost to the one or more reviewers to mine the corresponding one or more vote contracts to provide feedback on the content to the blockchain, the cost being based on the size of the smart contract;

provide the one or more vote contracts to the corresponding one or more users for mining by the one or more reviewers to store the feedback on the blockchain; and

forward compensation from the source to the one or more reviewers based on the review requirements for performing a review of the smart contract being met by the one or more reviewers.

8. The apparatus of claim 7 , wherein the review requirements to perform the review of the content comprise:

one or more of a sensitivity level of the content, a number of reviewers needed to perform the review, and minimum time or maximum time needed to perform the content review.

9. The apparatus of claim 7 , wherein the processor is further configured to:

confirm the review of the content is complete; and

confirm the review requirements were followed when the content was reviewed.

10. The apparatus of claim 7 , wherein the processor is further configured to:

determine an average vote requirement based on a number of reviewers affiliated with the blockchain; and

determine a minimum number of the reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement.

11. The apparatus of claim 10 , wherein the minimum number of reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement is based on one or more of a sensitivity level of the content and a time limit to complete the review.

12. The apparatus of claim 11 , wherein the processor is further configured to:

store the minimum number of the reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement in the smart contract.

13. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium configured to store at least one instruction that when executed by a processor of a device implementing a blockchain causes the processor to perform:

creating, via a computer-implemented moderator, a smart contract identifying content provided by a source and identifying review requirements for performing a review of the content via one or more reviewers, a size of the smart contract variably based on a moderator controlled complexity of a mathematical calculation required to mine the smart contract;

signing and validating, via the computer-implemented moderator, the smart contract;

communicating, via the computer-implemented moderator, the smart contract to the source to be stored in a blockchain for reviewing via the one or more reviewers;

receiving, via the computer-implemented moderator, information regarding a review of the content by the one or more reviewers;

generating, via the computer-implemented moderator, one or more vote contracts corresponding to the one or more users, the one or more vote contracts specifying a cost to the one or more reviewers to mine the corresponding one or more vote contracts to provide feedback on the content to the blockchain, the cost being based on the size of the smart contract;

providing, via the computer-implemented moderator, the one or more vote contracts to the corresponding one or more users for mining by the one or more reviewers to store the feedback on the blockchain; and

forwarding, via the computer-implemented moderator, compensation from the source to the one or more reviewers based on the review requirements for performing a review of the smart contract being met by the one or more reviewers.

14. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 13 , wherein the review requirements for performing the review of the content:

comprises one or more of a sensitivity level of the content, a number of reviewers needed to perform the review, and minimum time or maximum time needed to perform the content review.

15. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 13 , further configured to store at least one instruction that when executed by the processor causes the processor to perform:

confirming the review of the content is complete; and

confirming the review requirements were followed when the content was reviewed.

16. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 13 , further configured to store at least one instruction that when executed by the processor causes the processor to perform:

determining an average vote requirement based on a number of reviewers affiliated with the blockchain; and

determining a minimum number of the reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement.

17. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 16 , wherein the minimum number of reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement is based on one or more of a sensitivity level of the content and a time limit to complete the review.

18. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 16 , further configured to store at least one instruction that when executed by the processor causes the processor to perform:

storing the minimum number of the reviewers to fulfill the average vote requirement in the smart contract; and

transmitting the smart contract to a source of the content.