You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Suggestions To Make Curation More Rewarding - Part 2 - Curation Reward Inverse To Reputation, Community Silent Blacklist, Voting Power Refunds
I think you're onto something.
Safe to say that any system that can be exploited will be exploited. Also a simple system is also more likely to help rank and file steem members rather than the hard core who might be the only ones to figure it out.
Still think the simplest would be to make the rewards inversely proportional to reputation and followers. At rep 25 or under curation could be worth 50% and at rep 70 or over it could be worth 0%. Curating a low rep posted is a high risk proposition for any curator not doing charity work. It needs to be rewarded better.
That's an interesting idea. At 70 or above, most of the votes that affect payout tend to happen right at or right before the 30 min threshold anyway, which would still lock in significant rewards for established authors. I'd still cap the curation at above 0%, but that's just me. I don't really have a good reason for that.
You could make it simple. Curation reward = (75 - Reputation)%
I really don't think anyone with a reputation of 75 is going to need curation. I'm sure many would be very happy to get 100% of the post value. From what I can see some of the higher rep stuff is getting upvoted from the 15 minute mark. Everyone is just trying to jump in front of each other and I don't think a lot of value is added in the process.
That's what I was thinking as well.
"don't think anyone with a reputation of 75 is going to need curation."
Not now, anyway. However, in the future if Steemit continues to add new users, it's possible that we'll see "reputation inflation". Thanks for the great discussion thread!
Very good point. When I first looked into the reputation formula I was expecting some kind of time decay, but it's not there. A time decay feature would put reputation into an equilibrium that effectively ensures a ceiling.
Then the proposed curation formula would work long term :p
I think simply adding a separate curation reputation would make it much simpler to manage via decoupling the two variables.
The only real restrictions on standard reputation are:
I'm not sure that is true. My understanding is that rep can only be lost because of higher rep downvotes, but when it comes to upvotes there is no restriction. Thus there is technically no ceiling and nothing will ever reign in the highest reputation player(s) no matter how badly they behave. Some of the code is in this post :-
https://steemit.com/steemit/@arcange/6sbsvp-what-is-steemit-reputation-and-how-does-it-work
Ah, thank you for the clarification. It had been some times since I looked into those mechanics.
This does explain how I am slowly creeping up the 60's list, however.