You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Content-Type Value and Reward Discussion
You are right and your wrong. Even in the white paper, the economics of the posts is based upon "popularity", not quality. I do agree with you, because of opportunity costs.
The problem is that popularity is determined by whales and bots with the bandwagon effect and Panurge sheep. It's a game? Quality does not matter, just $$$? And who will win the most? Is this how to develop a product for the long term?
Yeah, I'm looking at the long term, quality, success, where people will want to come here because it will stand for something that represents quality, with a good reputation. Not a sleezebag gambling porn site.
I can see your position, though I wasn't saying we have to do or not do what the WhitePaper says in this case. I'm more talking about logical reality of where we want to go and what actually is better for Steemit's success and future.
But I have actually argued for quality from the WhitePaper with respect to value: Steemit Succeeds if We Make it Succeed - Analysis to Help Yourself and Steemit Grow in Quality
I'm not arguing with your premise. I want quality (my quality-subjective)! The problem steems ;) from the curation sides economic decisions. The way I see it going is that people curation is going to go to bots curation. May the bot wars begin.
If you can partition the market into sub-markets that may solve for junk content (for some people this is quality content). I believe moving content off the block chain and into other side-chains would create the partitioning.