You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Elimination of Curation Rewards
The examples you've given are very much determined upon your lens or perception of the world. You say cannabis is less important but a 'quality post on morality' is...
Who's supposed to judge that and give it context?
an expert on morality, ldo (though i do believe krnel is one of the best posters that lives on the front page_
Well that's what I mean. A post written about cannabis and one written about 'quality important truth, morality'.
The whales are mainly dudes that mine crypto currencies.
One likes smoking weed another thinks posts that are more like academic articles are less valuable to mass adoption.
In the same way they make their preferences known through their lens. Krnel makes his perceptions known in this response.
Hows a whale that enjoys smoking a bit of weed going to conform to such highly individualised and personal standards?
I'm not a fan of the 'weed' stuff, but my personal views are that we should find a way to encourage all types of content that are going to bring active and engaged users to the platform.
I don't think the issue is cannabis posts being good or bad.
I think it's that someone actively punished @KrNel by taking away some of his reward for a post that he highly valued. If it had happened to his lower quality post too, there would be less issue, but instead, people are deliberately trying to influence him to post things they want to see, and the form of influence isn't just carrots.
They include a stick, by removing rewards, and the biggest issue is that @KrNel is upset because his most favorite post he wrote got punished, while the lesser post he wrote got rewarded.
This truly irritates a writer, because instead of getting "commission" type influence, where he can choose to either write about his favorite topic, OR a topic he knows will make lots of money, he's instead forced to only write for the money, because people will actively ruin his profits by flagging what he just wants to share with people, despite any potential popularity payout.
I mean, we all know that some types of content won't make much money, but we publish it anyways, just to share the idea. It's fine if it doesn't make lots of money, but when it DOES make money, but someone else feels the need to remove that money, it's just a heartbreaking feeling.
Not of "oh no, I'm sad I don't get money", but a feeling of "This community is broken. Why am I punished for work that people liked and upvoted just because some rich person didn't like it? I deserve the money that people give me via votes."
It's the same as someone ordering food at a restaurant.
If it's good, people will pay for it and tip.
If it's bad, people want their money back. That's fair.
But what's unacceptable is for people to take more money than they spent, robbing the restaurant of money they collected from other patrons.
Same with flagging for these frivolous reasons.