You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Updated: With New Information - Can Someone Please Explain What's Going On Here? It's Stuff Like This That Will Kill Steemit
Quite an amusing read, and quite funny as well. But we rather not assume a higher ground when doing our curation. We may increase our standards over time (although, still kinda subjective). However, I think the considerations for this are the following:-
- That account has been actively posting external materials (which @curie wouldn't reward, but others may).
- There was suddenly a sliver of human-ness in that account - so we gave it a hit to encourage original content.
- Account seems to be here already for quite some time, powering up, not much cashing out.
- It may seem obvious to you to do this. The title is: Life Hack: Simple, Fast Way to Open Thin Plastic Trash Bags. I personally would just use my saliva to open trash bags. But what if you need to do it wholesale, in mass quantities of plastic-opening? I wouldn't have thought of this, for sure.
- Sometimes we do also reward a bunch of photographs and all that. What's the value in those? And what's the value in this?
Plus we have 2-3 layers of vouching for each suggested post. But I agree, rewards like this may dishearten certain folks. Sometimes it's error, sometimes it's just plain disagreement. In any case, thanks for bringing this up.
I appreciate that you took the time to respond.
If that's really it, then so be it, but objectively, it is not a thoughtful post that took much effort, and I think that is clear to everyone. And like I said in the post, cashiers and baggers use this in the grocery store, so we've all seen it before. And who besides cashiers and baggers even have this problem? That's why the comment highlighted in the image above was especially suspicious.
Also, to reward a tiny sliver of human-ness (and not an abundant amount at that) still seems contrary to the spirit of curie, and it also means you guys passed up the tons of people who have been producing original content for a LONG time. The effort required to produce ANY original content should not be underestimated. Plus, the guy was already making a bunch of money, just look at his wallet! That's just like throwing salt in the wound, hurtful to many that donate their time, money, and effort to support curie.
As to your last bullet point, it seems like you're attempting to appeal to the "subjectiveness" of curating. Look, I'm rescinding my apology to the author, and will come right out and say, "No, this is not a good post, by ANY standard, much less the standards set by a group of curators seeking outstanding work. Objectively, it is not good, period." I wanted to be polite, but now I just need to be direct. If this was a mistake, then it should be left at that, instead of defending something so clearly indefensible. I wouldn't mind setting up a poll to see how many in the community would agree with this opinion to make this crystal clear. And the fact that this was approved through 2-3 layers? If anything, that's even more disappointing and frankly, downright suspicious. I think this actually gave legs to the idea that @blustreak suggested.
Well, I did submit my post for consideration. As you point out, it was amusing, and entertaining. Also, it looks like it's gotten a lot of votes, and generated discussion, so the community has seen the value in it. I'm wondering if I have a chance to make it to the next selection list. Anyway, like I mentioned in your chatroom, I still support the vast majority of the work you guys do, and I really hope this is just an isolated incident.
Thank you!
We're a small team running 24/7 most of the times, and even that we can only manage to go through only half the amount of posts that's up everyday. I know about original content - my blogroll is pretty much it as well. What we do - we also scan for plagiarism and all that. And note that's the reason why channel curie in chat is there: for anyone to suggest worthy posts (usually not for self-promotion, but it is allowed)