Human vs. Bot Curators - Introducing Human Competition into the Equation - Allow Whales to Delegate Curation Power to Dolphins and Minnows
Voting power is currently concentrated with a very small number of individuals. Many of these people do not have the time to properly curate. There are also just way too many posts for one individual to review.
Whales also may be interested in supporting more mainstream topics like photography, philosophy, scientific research, financial review, etc. but only have the knowledge and expertise to properly curate a smaller niche of topics.
This is important because there are a lot of investors out there who will want to buy in to the platform, but will not want to curate. Many whales just want to invest. Also, there are many good curators out there who don't have the Steem Power to make their curation profitable.
Building off the model that @smooth has already implemented, Steemit should allow whales to easily delegate their voting power to other users. This would allow people with a large amount of SP to 'hire' good curators to find quality posts. Good curators could get paid for the quality work that they do, without needing to make a large out of pocket investment. This will also increase the competition between human and bot curators.
A whale should be able to specify a user to delegate voting authority to, a percentage of their SP to delegate, and a percentage of the curation reward that they will share with the curator.
delegate_voting_power(user, percentage_sp, percentage_reward)
Whales will be able to hire teams of curators, and delegate appropriate stakes of SP and reward percentages based on performance. Good curators will be in high demand, and there will be a competition to do the best job curating. Many humans will be able to outperform bots, and whales will likely shift away from using bots/lists to hiring the best curators that they can find.
This will begin the race to the top.
Good stuff, thanks for sharing this.
Synereo is going to launch something like this from the start as well. which could give them an inherent advantage.
Basically, the Steem core needs to give curation power to the people that want it and are good at it FAST, and if they don't, this platform will stagnate.
Steemit is a massive project. It is going to take some time to bring it to where it needs to be. There is a long list of feature requests, and everyone is aware that improvements need to be made. Comparing it with Synereo is a little difficult, as that project hasn't officially started yet - and while there are similarities between the two, they do serve somewhat different purposes.
I think that in the end, Steemit will have what it takes to become what it is meant to become. In the meantime, it is up to the community, leadership (owners/whales), and dev team to continue driving Steemit forward in the right direction.
There are a lot of things that users want done to the site, and they all take time. Prioritization is key. I think they are donig a good job. While it is always good to keep the competition in mind - I think we have a good thing going, and are making the right moves to continue progressing forward.
@timcliff and I seem to be in sync on this. We published some very similar thoughts roughly at the same time today. He's read my article and I support his ideas. Check mine out as well.
Bot War: Keeping Peace with a Reverse Fractional Formula
Yeah, I think we share very similar views and are proposing slightly different solutions to the same problem. We are definitely on the same wavelength 😀
I agree that bots are not necessarily 'bad' and more see empowering humans as the way to 'beat' the bots. I feel strongly that good human curators can easily outdo the current bot curators, and promote more quality content.
The big missing link right now is being able to connect the people with lots of SP with the humans that will do a good job curating. @smooth's solution is one way to go about it, but few whales are going to go through the trouble to do that. This proposal of delegated voting power will give whales the ability to do that with a lot less effort/work and risk than @smooth's way of manually doing it.
If the option was there, I'm fairly sure more whales will choose humans over bots.
Tim would you consider working together on my project "Coterie Wrest"?
Thanks for considering me, and it looks like a cool project, but I've already got my hands full.. No time for new projects 🙂
Totally understand. I'm in the same situation.
I think it is a great idea @timcliff. Implementing this, we will create a new job market while improving the quantity and quality of content curated.
I know some whales are contracting people to do this job, but making it easy and available to everybody could be a kill app for steem.
I hope @dantheman, will read this and propose something in this line in the next upgrade.
Yeah, I do too! @ned upvoted the post which is hopeful :)
I like the direction of this for sure
Ok I am very familiar with this idea. I just really want to know how you want to compare quality of curators. who is better ?
I am disgusted by current situation .the categories like : trading, money, investing are full of nonsense post .
I do not want even add this tag below my posts.
The whales are doing worst possible service to steemit by forcing people to write spam. I swear this is like 95% of money goes to spammers who "copy paste " nonsense images of charts taken from the websites without any reasonable content. Those curator(bots) created by whales are evaluating nonsense content.
how you want to deal with this ?
Tell me and I will help voluntarily , without any requirement of reward. I want help to steemit growth.
With the model that I am proposing, the whales who have large amount of SP would each be able to set their own criteria for what makes a 'good' curator.
This should help with (although not necessarily completely solve) the issue you bring up, because it would shift the curation process away from automation (bots and lists) and more to human curators who can spend the time finding quality content. Most of the curation projects that have humans behind them (@smooth, the Curie project, @robinhoodwhale) have had pretty good success with identifying and upvoting quality content.
yes i think the bot curation is very open to failures in the keyword search lists which create a vote action but without the true ability to read and analyze the content in terms of presentation and quality value. Real curation ie an intelligent person that reads articles, i am sure is more efficient and possibly more profitable for whales in the long run. As indeed Steemit,s success as i see it relies very much on the provision and rewarding of quality posts!! upvoted. What is good for Steem is good for us all no doubt !
Yes, agreed 😀
As an author / content creator I am seeking a good home for my ongoing project. I am utterly in a flux about what to do here. I would love to find somewhere I could gain a clear understanding of the operational parameters in play at steemit in order to be able to work creatively in a fair environment.
I am aware that those in the developer roles at steemit have their hands full however I need to get a serious understanding of how things really work. If anyone in the know would care to speak to me about what I am planning and how to utilize this platform best I would really appreciate it.
I can try to help. What types of questions do you have?
are you on steemit chat - direct messages? A number of my thoughts you have addressed with your other post with suggested modifications and additions. but if you are on direct chat I would love to speak.
Yes, I did respond to your direct message in Steemit chat. Let me know if there is anything else I can do to help :)
I can see the benefits of this system. But there is also a downside: if all the whales start to use their voting power, there will be less power for users with smaller amount of SP.
When the whales are not voting, they are basically delegating their power to all other users. I think this makes the platform a little bit fairer for everybody.
Good point. Definitely something to consider!