You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Poll: Does Steemit Content Influence the Price of Steem?

in #steem8 years ago (edited)

No
"Quality" is subjective.
Just look at the crap on the trending page, that's what steemit holds as quality. ill take a good joke with a pay out of $0.02 over a pict of a bug on a leaf that has a pay out of 80 bucks. people tying to push this idea of "quality" are trying to push what they think steemit should be about. steemit as a whole obviously doesn't care what one persons considers to be quality and by trying to force people into making posts that the "quality" enforcer wants is only pushing people away.
Imo atleast.

Sort:  

You're building your logic on the premise that Steemit is forcing topics onto people. There's not Steemit entity that is acting in such a manner.

People upvote articles from authors, whose articles were upvoted in the past. That's how they get a better curation reward.

In effect, rich users get richer, and good content by minnows remains unnoticed. There's a post on my blog with a clean solution to this problem, but developers didn't thanks notice.

you are making assumptions. I never said anything about forcing people to do anything. I do agree that the rich get richer while the minnows do all the work.

Here's a direct quote from you:

steemit as a whole obviously doesn't care what one persons considers to be quality and by trying to force people into making posts that the "quality" enforcer wants is only pushing people away.

I had never heard of this 30 min rule. Sounds stupid to me, after 30 min a post is buried and usually not voted on by anyone except the followers of the person posting. they have a lot of stuff to fix still.

Is "good content" not the same thing as Quality? If not "good" is also subjective.

I agree with everything else you said. In fact i thnk what you are saying is the same as me.

Im saying we all have our own opinions on what is "good" or "quality" and it does not matter what a single person thinks the post is. the idea that it is like you said it making it a situation where people tat make good posts about subjects that the whales don't like do not have a chance to make money. I have had posts with 90+ up votes that pay out 0.12 and then if its something a whale likes my first 2 upvotes stick it in the $70 dollar range and then it gets thrown on the hot page. it might be a crap post that only gets 30 upvotes in the end but because the whales considered it "good" or "quality" work it paid out. Quality and good are subjective.
The origami flowers are just proof that it is that way. By setting up a situation where people are forced (as in the only way to get paid) to make their content good or quality according to a couple people it pushes people away because good and quality are subjective.
I do not think half the stuff on the trending page is of quality but obviously others (whales) do or it would not be up there. a lot of it has to do with the curation crap too. but 2 times now i have been the first person to upvote a dollarvigalante post and i didn't even get 1 cent from it. im trying to stop upvoting crap because i know the amount i get paid from it is not worth the damage it is doing to steemit in a whole. 2 times i got first upvote on dollarvigalantes post and both times it didn't even pay out a cent.
So the people trying to bring quality and good posts are actually pushing people away not bring them in. It is a vicious cycle and honestly looking at the trending page daily really kills my moral. they should call it "Whales like" instead of trending. fucking feminists posts that are complete shit and lies with 30 votes that pay out 300 bucks is retarded but its what the whales like i guess. Just my opinion though.

P.S.
im not saying dollarvigalantes posts are crap. i was just using him as a refrence as to how little curration pays out for minnows.

P.P.S.
Someone trying to push an idea or force an idea is not the same thing as forcing someone to do something.

OK, I see your point - we are talking about the same thing, from two different perspectives. Indeed, the minnows' vote usually follows the whales', if any curation income is to be expected. And if minnows vote on something good, it hardly pays out, without a whale chipping in.

Btw, there's a 30 minute period after a post is published, during which your vote's weight is lowered. The closer to the 30 minute mark it is, the more weight you have. After that, you have full weight. I don't understand this logic, it's complete nonsense and I have no idea why it was introduced - supposedly to hinder bots, voting first, before real users. Now bots can simply vote 30 minutes after the post was published.

Yep, your ideas of what is quality others might not agree with.
Quality is subjective.
So that quote stands firm in my eyes.
Care to say how it is false?

atleast use the whole quote too.

people tying to push this idea of "quality" are trying to push what they think steemit should be about. steemit as a whole obviously doesn't care what one persons considers to be quality and by trying to force people into making posts that the "quality" enforcer wants is only pushing people away.

I've not mentioned quality of posts at any point in time, you have. All I said was that good content from minnows is not discovered, as people vote on articles, written by authors, who keep getting good rewards for their work - that's how you get better curation income, right? And if you vote for an unpopular author, you will get nothing. Hence the vicious cycle of origami and cooking articles on Steemit.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.15
TRX 0.16
JST 0.028
BTC 68616.15
ETH 2450.08
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.43