My Curator Remark Anthology Is In The Works
I am a Curator with one of this platform's most effective guilds, @curie. Apart from engaging with over a hundred posts on a daily basis in a bid to find that "diamond in the rough post" (which is what Curie is about), myself and the other curators (and reviewers) spend quite some time together either discussing the growth of the curation community, or giving feedback on posts, or simply just doing what a close-knit community does: bond.
It was in one of these engagements that @carlgnash suggested I put together an "anthology" (anthology?) of the proposer comments I send in with my submissions. Carl and @liberosist think I succeed in turning that into an art-form.
To get better understanding of what I am talking about, you need a simplistic rundown of Curie operations:
- Her dedicated curators comb through Steemit to find quality posts from new and "unsuccessful" (judged by past rewards) authors on Steemit. This is done under spelt out guidelines that can be found on the open #curie channel on steemit.chat.
- These posts are submitted and put through a second layer of assessment on the desks of the reviewers. The posts that get okayed at this stage receives a generous upvote from @curie and her voting trails.
Often times a subjective value of an author's post may shine through with a good quality argument and pitching by the curator who proposes that post. As such, streemain has a section for an optional "Comment by The Proposer." Streemian is the platform where curators propose posts and get feedback on the statuses of same submissions.
I scarcely leave this section of the form unfilled, and the comments I leave there is the reason for this forthcoming anthology.
Already, you may be asking: why is this necessary? Well, as an artist (photographer and writer) one cannot over-emphasize to me the benefit of a quality feedback. Personally, I follow everyone that drops good comment, that actually took some effort, on any of my posts. Now take this a step higher and imagine a lawyer curator trying to argue on why they think your post should be ascribed more value and given a chance at higher visibility. That will be the best thing I want to read, and I assume that a lot of other creators share that sentiment. I mean with all the effort that goes into creating the amazing posts that curie upvotes daily.
A Little of What To Expect
Here are the remarks for the last three posts I submitted and I am proud to say I got ALL of them approved:
"Submitting this post is both me exercising my confidence in judging quality literature, not by its volume; and me testing Liberosist's resolve to approve that meme without any words. Lol. On a more serious note, may I request that this author be judged also by his compendium of works here on Steemit. Did you see that next free-write that followed this one? That was good. I understand the length of his works, which are mostly flash-fiction, would not be favoured much by curators. But I'll believe curie votes quality than quantity. Personally I'm really satisfied with this one, with this author."
I am still not sure if to include links to the posts in question. I will love your feedback on that. This next one should tell you a bit why I am concerned about that:
“I hope this is not just me being overly empathetic of the aging author, and having clutters around my judgment. Post is personal but good. I love how it ended. The lessons derived from it all. I think it's enough to sell this piece. I trust your judgment and I send this in confident it will be filtered out if it fails the sieve size. Lastly, I hope three posts in the last month cuts it [for the author as "persistent"]. Author had a borderline curie vote in the distant past.”
And one last one...
“Finally one I can risk my dire CS on. The short but insightful prose is well researched and would be useful to businesses within the catchment. The two definitions for tax avoidance and evasion were directly taken from Investopedia and are referenced below, although I think the author could have had those in quotes. I will suggest that to him in comment. Overall a nice decent original content with some obvious knowledge and authority, and decent English. And author is persistent with little success too. I hope to have said enough to make a case for this post... and my CS :-D”
This last one actually makes me think of one more benefit to this: it could end up helping creators come to light on subtle things that curators consider, that probably is why they are still not meeting success on Steemit.
Finally, this is just an introduction to a fantastic idea my friend and bigger brother, @carlgnash proposed. I look forwrad to feedbacks, collaborations, and general help in shifting this towards the benefit of the Steem platform, and curation in particular.
And, may I solicit you vote Witness Curie if you haven't done that already. If you care for a tour to get convinced the more why Curie should have your witness vote, we are ready to take your hand. Just comment or meet us in chat.
Fun Fact: Did You Know? Curie has contributed 5% of the entire Steemit Reward pool? Now you know!
Image from pixabay
I really enjoyed this. I have had the privilege of seeing two of these before and the entire reason I suggested this in the first place is because yes, I think there is value in this to content creators here on this platform. As you suggest, hearing how a curator would argue for a post, seeing what things a curator picks out as strong points worthy of a @curie nomination, and what are held up as possible risks in the submission - this is very valuable feedback and I think it is good to shine a light on it. I don't think a link to the post in question is necessary for this to have value, but perhaps a very short synopsis might give each comment more context. I am suggesting just a few sentences, e.g. "This comment was left while proposing a short story of about 500 words on the topic of BLANK", or what have you. Just a suggestion of course. Happy to resteem this to give it more visibility - I think many authors will be interested to read. And yes that is a fun fact!
Much love - Carl
As a writer I recognize (with humility and gratitude) that writing is a collaborative act. The work is better because of my readers and editors who rescue the fire from the ashes, so to speak. In the same way that a good listener helps us to overhear /clarify our thoughts and even our silences.
Thank you, @misterakpan, for the good work you do helping others. I wish you continued success.
Warmly, Yahia
@mistaakpan, I must say you guys are doing such a great work there and I think that writers should get the value for every good piece they put up. Personally I give a thumps up to @curie and the crew. I will sure give my witness vote to Curie. But I don't mind if you want to convince me the more #mistaakpan
Every potential steemian who values growth understands the imports of feed backs. You have done well sir. Well done.
I totally agree with you. That's the same assumption I'm basing everything on.
Curation should not be just about finding good posts and getting them the up-vote, it should be about feeding back to the whole community as to what makes a good post and why the curie members/team as a whole have upvoted the post in the first place.
One thing i would like to see is a comment on a post once it has been upvoted by curie. The other day i saw a photography post that was curie upvoted and resteemed. I personally know the reasons why it was up-voted but it would be really good to see a comment from one of the team letting the author know why it was up-voted and by what mechanism. It was apparent that the author didn't even know of curie or why he got such a large upvote.
I have used the comment section once: to let the reviewer know that I have confirmed that the author owns the website where the content first appeared on. Basic. I loved reading this. I love how you "make a case" for the posts - and the touch of humor.