Steemit Crypto Academy Contest / S17W5 [SUMMARY]: Whales In Steem blockchain

Introduction

Hello steemians,

This week at the Steemit Academy, we explored the impact and role of whales on the Steem blockchain, a subject that is both controversial and central to understanding the dynamics of our platform. “Whales”, or large holders of Steem, are influential actors whose actions can shape many aspects of the functioning and economics of the blockchain.

The week's theme, Whales in Steem Blockchain, guided our participants through a series of critical questions, intended to shed light not only on who these whales are, but also what responsibilities they bear to the community. The investigation expanded to understand how these users influence the value of cryptocurrencies on Steem and what role they play precisely in the functioning of the blockchain.

Participants were also tasked with exploring the different phases of whale activity on Steem, and analyzing how this affects other users. They had to consider the potential challenges that ordinary users might face due to the presence of whales and identify strategies to protect their investments.

Finally, we examined how the presence of whales influences the participation and engagement of ordinary users on the platform, and how we could encourage a greater diversity of voices and contributions.

This report compiles the responses and analysis provided by our participants, offering a deep perspective on the influence of whales and proposing avenues for a more balanced and inclusive future on Steem.

Participation statistics

During the competition of the fifth week of the seventeenth season of the SEC, dedicated to the "whales" of the Steem blockchain, we had the pleasure of welcoming 18 participants. This enthusiasm demonstrates the strong interest in the subject and the continued commitment of our community to exploring the influential aspects of blockchain.

Among the 18 contributions received, we identified one submission that was generated by artificial intelligence. At our academy, the use of AI to create content in competitions is strictly prohibited. This rule aims to ensure that all work reflects the originality and personal effort of the participants, encouraging authentic thinking and deep understanding of the subject matter.

The discovery of this AI-generated submission required immediate action. This entry has been disqualified for failing to comply with the competition rules, underscoring our commitment to maintaining a high ethical standard and encouraging fair and authentic participation. This situation reminds us of the importance of continued vigilance in the review process and the need to strengthen participant information regarding the rules and expectations of our competitions.

Total number of entries	Invalid entry	Plagiarized content
18	0	1

_{Score Distribution}

_{Performance Distribution(%)}

The two graphs presented clearly illustrate the distribution of participant performances and scores in a specific context, likely an event or competition. Here is a unified interpretation of the data represented in the graphs:

General Performance:

• The majority of participants (67%) were rated as having a "Good" performance, indicating that most met event expectations competently and effectively.
• A significant segment (17%) excelled, showing exceptional understanding and application of required tasks, rated as "Excellent".
• A smaller group (11%) achieved "Acceptable" results, suggesting just sufficient performance to meet the minimum criteria.
• Notably, 5% of entries used ChatGPT, which could indicate an exploration of the use of artificial intelligence in tasks, but also raise questions about the authenticity and originality of the submissions.

Numerical Distribution of Scores:

• The scores reveal a more detailed absolute number: around 12 participants were rated "Good", which is consistent with the high proportion observed in the performance distribution.
• Participants classified as "Excellent" are numerically fewer (3), which indicates a high bar to reach this category.
• A moderate amount of participants (2) are in the "Acceptable" category.
• Only one participant is noted for using ChatGPT, which may require additional rule clarification or disciplinary action depending on the event rules.

Points to Note:

• Results show widespread engagement and robust performance from participants, with distribution concentrated primarily in the "Good" and "Excellent" categories.

• The use of ChatGPT, although in the minority, deserves special attention to ensure that contributions are original and within established guidelines, especially if the event aims to assess personal skills and originality.

• No entries were deemed "Invalid", reflecting the overall relevance of the submissions to the event requirements.

Top 3 users this week

In our evaluation process, we first assessed the quality of the participants' performances, with a focus on their interactions with fellow contestants.

For choosing the top three participants, we considered their performance scores and how they engaged with others. Additionally, we made a special selection based on a standout article that provided exceptional content on the discussion topic. Here are the top three participants we have acknowledged this week.

Ranking	Username	Article
1	@hamzayousafzai	Link
2	@sahmie	Link
3	@starrchris	Link

Conclusion

In conclusion, this week's evaluation highlighted the exceptional talent and commitment of our participants. Their ability to interact effectively and bring valuable perspectives greatly enriches our discussions. We salute the hard work and dedication of all competitors and look forward to seeing how they continue to excel and inspire in future sessions. Congratulations to our top performers, and thank you to everyone who contributed to this week’s success.