You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A new approach to Content Reward Allocation
We are dealing with unorganic behavior driven by bots. Its a question of incentives that rewards people to upvite before the bots...even if they didnt read the articles.
You miss the point - the bots only upvote because they believe the whales will. I saw a post today that had 31 votes but it only had a value of $4, because the whales were concentrating on noobs. So any bot voting that post in expectation it would perform the way previous ones by that writer did, would have been disappointed.
If the distribution is spread out far and wide, it becomes harder for a bot to predict, and will require the owner of the account to actually log in and read, to predict the value.
A agree with @alyssas but I'd add that it is all part of system dynamics. As the user base grows beyond the extreme early adopters, whales, and steemit insiders that have dominated it so far, the results will change, including the behavior and success rate of bots.
@dantheman's proposal here is good in the sense that it tries to take a fresh look at the problem and improve the algorithm overall, rather than being as clearly a knee-jerk reaction to current dynamics as was the earlier proposal to simply remove curation rewards. Still I think there is a lot of value in letting the system grow and seeing how things actually work as it grows, rather than jumping to hasty conclusions.