You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Should Curators be Paid MORE than Authors or At Least Better Compensated to Grow Steemit?!?
I agree the average consumer just wants to read and connect with there topics. I recommended in previous posts if we can search by reputation. That might help in aid in finding better content with great writers and then with your specific interests.
I think overtime we will get wonderful authors and curators. I just want to speed up the process becaue I love it here so much but can be improved for sure. Makes me think about how twitter was in the early stages but we are much more advanced.
Thanks for sharing your great insight!
There is not really a true system of reputation, in the sense like critics associated with a certain taste or orientation , i'm not sure there is even easy way to have sorted list of users based on what they read or curate.
I saw somewhere there is an app that have something like curation trail which can be similar, i think it can work by group of users associated with a curation trail, which can be used to follow specific group of curators which could be close to have easy pick on list of posts following the curation trail of specific group of curators, regardless of their voting power.
If group of curators like this can be easily seen on the ui, associated with certain topics, that could probably help to get to certain kind of content matching some interest based on advise of these groups.
Or maybe a system of colored vote like colored coin to indicate a vote from a specific group of curators that can be easily followed to catch on post for a particular topic of interest, even if they dont have strong general voting power.
Putting all the power of curation only in big investor is not necessarily a good thing, because they dont necessrily have good skills as content critics, or to detect post that can be popular for a certain kind of public.
You make some great points here about curation trail and colored vote for particular topics. That is something to bring up more to bring more awareness and maybe something similar can be implemented to improve the system.
The voting power is just delegated based on who has invested what in this company/currency. It is the best way to give the power to the people. It would level out I think once new investors come, price goes up, old investors cash out and most is distributed to many and not just a few.
The thing also is that readers dont necessrily have any steem or steem power, and it seem a bit hard to have a valuation of the majority of readers who dont have any steem power, and shouldnt need to have much or any.
Not everyone interested in social media will necessarily be in to get rewards based on their reading or voting, and there should be a way to take this in account beside of the steem power.
Because if the audience is to grow outside of investment circle, need to have a way to value activity of non investors, even if there is no direct monetizing of this activity with the steem system.
Well the thing about the audience is, they can and will just come here for the content. Just because there are rewards does not mean anyone has to care about them. That will be a barrier for users to get over.
If you have no SP you must create value in posts to attract it, like all other social media sites. If rewards is what your after.
There are some kinks to work out for sure. :)
The thing is for me it lacks a layer between authors and readers, like the equivalent of labels for music distribution or edition director for news papper.
For music industry, it needs labels because if just every music creator would pile up their track in a generalist distribution, the end consumer would be lost into all the submissions.
Its same with newspappers, there are general organismes to czntralize news, but consumer dont get their news directly from there, but get a newspapper directed by edtiorial lines, who does this filtering to fit a partifular public.
There cant be any objective one fit all criteria that will make a content valuable to everyone the same, and its why all content distribution is organized in clusters such as labels or news papper to target directly a particular audience interested in a particular taste that the label or editor is able to catch up, for consumer to already have a pre selection of item they might be interested in, because they trust a particular label or editor for that kind of style or information.
And for me in the present state of things, its hard to find an equivalent of this on steemit.
Like some kind of clustering of articles based on a filtering made by person who know a particular audience cluster andbare trusted for their taste or reviewing, to get directly the kind of article that can be interesting for a particular audience, even if they dont invest in steem power to have high upvote value, like consumer of a particular musuc style wont invest in label share because they are more trusting the label to find the good artist that they like.
Even if this selectioning is always hard to quantify objectively, its what will drive consumer choice of content rather than leaving it in anarchy relying on snow balling of largest global market and profits, which is not alwaus what everyone will seek for.
The content need to be sorted out to fit what they are looking for, even if they are not seeking for reward or creating value other than reading content that interest them.
Yes these are fantastic points and really giving me a new look at the platform. Thank you for that.
I take it as it's new and working out the layout of the platform.
That being said, how can we address this suggestions to the creators or moderators?
That is one thing I know nothing about to be honest. Who works on the site? Improves it? Listen to us? Ect?
As far as i know, im not sure there is a central dev team, development seem to be based on satellite application that are run via other sites.
Im not sure if the architecture of the steemit site allow integration of others apps as plugin on the main site.
But the pb is also finding the good persons to animate and moderate those channels or group.
But i think that could be a good thing to have groups or channels with more predictible content rating based on more well defined criteria with internal rating, both for author who can find more easily an audience with a style of writing and for reader to browse easily to find the group that can fit their interest.
Its not only a matter of tags, as for news, for any given event there can be different point of views or perpective on it, which is why readers would choose a newspapper over another instead of random one just to get the information. And author can kniw which style and position to adopt to be published in which kind of newspapper.
For me its this sort of things that is missing from steem atm, its too horizontal and one tracked in the upvote, a'd its often hard for author to reach their audience , and the upvote can only catch one type of voting, and maybe the most general "big hit" but the criteria of selection are still a bit chaotic, which i dont think is a good thi'g either for author and readers, and even curators might miss a good guideline to kno how to vote meaningfully in a way that really helps all readers to find their topics.