You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: A case for eliminating curation rewards

in #steem9 years ago (edited)

But why not reward the people who have done their work well (assume it has really been done well)? With a "right" reward people will feel even better, so more engagement.

Because there is no standard to tell what 'well' is , 'well' is subjective, some people might think well is this and other may think well is another thing, there is no way to define 'well'.

But current design is not good doesn't mean changing it to anything else is good.

I don't want to change it, i want to eliminate it :)

Maybe in the future we could find a much better curation rewards system but meanwhile it is doing a lot damage and is undermining the credibility of steem.

Sort:  

Because there is no standard to tell what 'well' is , 'well' is subjective, some people might think well is this and other may think well is another thing, there is no way to define 'well'.

This is why we have voting. We're trying to define "well" by "quantity of people/SP upvoted minus downvoted". If you disagree with this definition, then we have no base to discuss.

I don't want to change it, i want to eliminate it :)

It's still a change.

By the way I just found that you replied to my post earlier, so it's my fault to link it here for several times, sorry.

This is why we have voting. We're trying to define "well" by "quantity of people/SP upvoted minus downvoted". If you disagree with this definition, then we have no base to discuss.

This is the problem 'well' in the platform is currently defined by being 'content that pay the most.' not ' content that people like the most'

[Nesting]

This is the problem 'well' in the platform is currently defined by being 'content that pay the most.' not ' content that people like the most'

Sounds like you want to get rid of stake based voting. That's interesting. Ask Dan?
IMHO without stake based voting Steem is no difference than reddit or other sites.

Sounds like you want to get rid of stake based voting. That's interesting. Ask Dan?
IMHO without stake based voting Steem is no difference than reddit or other sites.

I don't want to get rid of stake based voting. It's the whole point of buying steem, to have more influence than others.
I want a system that do not use money to change people's voting behavior , I want a natural system where people upvote for stuff they like.

[Nesting]

This is the problem 'well' in the platform is currently defined by being 'content that pay the most.' not ' content that people like the most'

I don't want to get rid of stake based voting. It's the whole point of buying steem, to have more influence than others.

Yes, with stake based voting, naturally you'll have some person has more influence than others. Then naturally you'll have 'content that pay the most' as the 'content that people like the most'. You can't have your cake and eat it. What do you really want indeed?

I want a system that do not use money to change people's voting behavior ,

Use money to encourage people to vote for better content is not evil. BTW "better" is defined above.

I want a natural system where people upvote for stuff they like.

I'll say it again: this can be done with a linear rewarding mechanism.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.09
TRX 0.32
JST 0.033
BTC 108429.02
ETH 3871.16
USDT 1.00
SBD 0.63