RE: Let authors decide how much rewards they want to allocate to curators
Hm. My knee jerk reaction is curators are definitely not "just as important" as content creators. In fact, I would say that curation is crap without comments to support an upvote.
I've managed to get on a few curation guild bots' radar. Isn't that sweet? Except my post, which I may have spent hours working on, gets 100+ votes and barely makes a dollar. Give the curators more? WHY?
Why should a greater percentage be given to mindless bots? You see, a hamster can be trained to push the upvote button, but it takes someone who cares to read the content and leave an intelligent comment.
In fact, I would even say that if you took monetary curation awards away and replaced them with support or community advocate badges, I would be 100% behind that.
Excuse the language but curation is shit. I think we can agree that people connect with PEOPLE. You want to reward someone? Then give a handsome one to the commentators.
Which is exactly what this proposal is about, incentivize people to manually curate and actually read content instead of robots.
Unfortunately we seem to be in the Golden Age of curation guilds and Steem-trails where just about anyone can join and ride the coattails of a voting bot and I don't see a way of closing Pandora's Box on it. For transparency: I use SteemVoter because I personally have about 20 people that I follow who have quality posts 90% of the time. That auto-vote shows my support for them specifically because I have developed a relationship with them. But I also check Steemd to see what the bot upvoted and almost always follow up, sometimes hours later, with a comment.
I try my best to follow the Golden Rule (or law of reciprocity) - Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I have no expectations of earnings because I cannot rely on it as steady income. But comments... I love comments. I look forward to them. I wish more people would leave comments on my blog. I would definitely award that if I could.
NOW...
If I was going to propose a grand social experiment on Steemit, I'd probably get rid of the payout structure altogether. Implement @timcliff's idea of an esteem score and incorporate a structured payout based on your score at the end of the night.
X-level esteem scores get X$ paid out in 24 hours
Start every day at zero esteem.
Do you have a link to timcliff's idea?
Sure do! :)
https://steemit.com/gamification/@timcliff/introducing-the-esteem-score-proposal-to-add-gamification-to-the-steemit-user-experience
Thank you :)
Sounds solid but then we would have to sit at our computers and not sleep to keep it gaining rewards for the period.
I do think the comments make the platform worthwhile. You pretty much summed up my feelings in both your comments.
I notice a lot authors that get big rewards consistently almost never vote, like rarely ever and the few comments they make is just to replies on their own post. They hardly give back but reap so so much.
I don't mind the current voting system. Even if i get pennies but comments I'm happy. I actually had a post the other day do quite well and not a single comment and i was actually hurt. I was like why no one saying anything? I was happy for the recognition but i wasn't getting my full steemit fix without the chitchat that makes steemit so fun.