RE: On Guilds and Managing Expectations
I would like to emphasize a point that you made, because I have experienced it personally. This is unique to Steem Guild in particular, though it might be endemic to all curation initiatives.
The Steem Guild rules say that the guild is not to vote on controversial posts, which is understandable. But apparently that extends beyond any particular post. There is a subjective judgement made about whether or not a given author is a "controversial person" who is unworthy of the support of the guild without regard to the content of their posts.
I know this is the case for myself, because I was told this by a guild member...
you come with a past reputation of controversial posts.
So, I'm essentially blacklisted by the main curation initiative that was intended to benefit similarly situated users. I've never been Curie eligible, because my rep was too high from the very beginning. However, I have struggled to get my work recognized at times.
So I agree with your concerns about guild members acting as gatekeepers. I have direct experience of being excluded from consideration for SG upvotes, due to some sort of character judgement or apparently disqualifying conduct that predates SG...
It's pretty frustrating, to be honest.
This is an inevitable consequence of managed voting. Think of it this way. Imagine some super controversial topic -- say abortion. So you have one high quality pro-choice post. One high-quality pro-life post. And an animated gif of a cat falling asleep.
The cat gif is what gets the guild vote. Becauese voting for the pro life post will potentially offend the pro-choice guild backers. And voting for the pro-choice post will potentially offend the pro-life guild backers.
I know what youre thinking -- vote for both. Equal time. But thats just going to offend both groups (or at least some of both groups).
The cat gif probably adds more value (in drawing users to the site). People love cats. Can't resist them. Meanwhile people have been blogging about he same tired pro-choice pro-life argument since the 90s, and since that time do you know what happened? Popular (i.e. non-celebrity) blogging mostly died, and was replaced by modes of interaction people actually enjoy, like sharing cat pics or comments about their day.
People who love cats are misguided (and, dare i say, probably witches). But i don't think the cat gif winning out is a bad thing (necessarily). Just that its an inevitable consequence of voting delegation/management schemes. With each level of separation between the person doing the voting and the person bankrolling the voting, the material that wins becomes more general, more vanilla flavored, more centrist.
Its like the kenysian beauty contest. At the first level, youre voting for the prettiest girl. Then youre voting for the girl you think everyone else thinks is the prettiest. Then, youre voting for the girl you think everyone else thinks everyone else thinks is the prettiest.
That said, my point would have been better served with an example not so tailored to personal tastes in content.
Say an impassioned argument from a trump supporter about militarism (or whatever the hell trump is supposed to stand for), an impassioned argument from a bernie sanders (the political guy not the steem guy) supporter, and a cookie cutter, middle of the road don't offend anyone Hillary clinton talking point press release. The clinton thing is the worse, and would probably get the least amount of votes if people were judging quality directly (at least in my opinion)
But as the source of the voting power gets further and further removed from the people actually casting the vote, i think Hillary gains ground against her two divisive competitors.
Maybe thats a good thing. but its a thing.
Which in a lot of ways, arguably, runs the world. Steemit can either join the train, or try to be about "real quality", and miss the train. At the moment we are largely missing the train (actually doing neither since the quality is mostly shit, and content that might actually attract a broad audience is shunned as too lowbrow).
I wasn't disputing your point about voting anomalies.
I kinda want to see the cat gif tbh
Excellent!
I suppose that this is inevitable when personal preferences are involved, but I thought that the guilds were supposed to evaluate content more objectively - that they were supposed to evaluate the quality of the posts, not the authors. It is the content that should be rewarded, if I'm understanding their goals correctly.
I don't think it's right for a guild that has been delegated the CEO's voting power to intentionally exclude certain users, particularly if the posts themselves are not controversial. This represents a real problem with those who have been delegated that kind of responsibility. But I don't think you'll get an answer from the guild members about that. Perhaps @ned can comment on it?
Im waiting for HF 17 to comment as I've been entirely hands off on voting guilds. :) Blockchain level vote power delegation is coming....
Fair enough.
But it is your power being delegated to Steem Guild right now. And the response/reactions by some of its members and supporters is troubling.
That is excellent! I remember the idea floating around, but I didnt expect anything to come of it. Glad to learn it is on the way.
I am not sure it is fair to say you are hands off, if your voting power is delegated to the guild.
Eh, give the guy a break. It's clear what he meant. He has refrained from commenting, due to the upcoming changes he mentioned. After voting power can be delegated on the blockchain level, this will be a moot point.
once the abuse is institutionalized, it won't be abuse anymore? BEcause we can only assume that the same practices everyone is concerned about now (SG upvoting their own shitposts as payment for reading steemit) will continue.
Although I understand his point and yours, I disagree it isn't an issue right now. As, it is a creditability issue for SteemIt, and he is a Founder.
I would say it "appears" it is not a hands-off approach. Appearances matter.
I didn't burn him at the stake. ;)