You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Elimination of Curation Rewards
Take a look at this, it goes back to some of the stuff we talked about in the downvote thread, and i think its a much more workable solution to curation problems
Take a look at this, it goes back to some of the stuff we talked about in the downvote thread, and i think its a much more workable solution to curation problems
I am in favor of doing both. (Removing curation rewards, and switching to a more linear rewards formula.)
Obviously, im not. But i will say that even if I were strongly in favor of eliminating curation rewards, i would not be in favor of doing the two simultaneously.
I think that there is a very strong case to be made that a more linear reward distribution formula could fix many of the percieved problems with curation rewards. IMO, we should at least see what effect the changes have before we throw the baby out with the bath water.
I'd go in reverse, removal than adjustments, but I do agree that they shouldn't happen at the same time.
I think the bigger problem isn't how the rewards are distributed, it's the fact the motivation of each voter comes from the desire to earn a reward. It seems almost like a conflict of interest. I want popular/trending content on the site to be elevated because people find it interesting, not because they believe it will provide them with the greatest reward.
When considering the act of voting, you shouldn't be considering yourself, you should be considering only the content on which you're voting.
That's what I believe at least :)
Whatever you think which one is bigger, I think both of them are big problems ;)
Good comment! I just wanted to make the observation that people are going to think of themselves when voting anyways, even if what they are thinking is that they could later be asked to justify the vote because it can be traced back to them.