Low Hanging Fruit - Steemits curation problem urgently needs to be fixed!
Steemit has a big problem at the moment; the irresistibility of low hanging fruit.
I am of course talking about how "curators" can choose only to vote for authors with previous form, without a care for the quality of the individual item. This means copious good content is falling through the cracks as the authors remain "unproven". This causes a vicious circle of polarisation that's very hard to break.
There is nothing groundbreaking about voting for an article by one of the top travel bloggers on Steemit. While the content may indeed be fantastic and deserve lots of credit, do the curators really deserve extra credit for backing an almost foregone conclusion?
If the goal of Steemit genuinely is to nurture and reward all good content and discussion, there needs to be a lot more incentive to route out and point out the truly great content that flows through the site every minute orfevery hour.
I strongly believe there should be LESS reward for voting for someone with "good form", and MORE reward for discovering good content from someone "untested".
This doesn't mean penalising someone for being popular. They deserve every penny they get, but do the curators? Genuine curators would have meaningful incentive for deeper exploration and discovery. This in turn would be more equitable for those minnows who have been "screaming amazing content" which has so far fallen on deaf ears.
If I may use a different analogy, right now curation on Steemit is like horse racing, except the favourites are given the same long odds as the outsiders.
This needs to change, for everyones sakes.
NSFW
If you're easily offended by cartoon testicles... RIP
Upvote x 2 For you sir and some KLYE ART!
@calva upvote this wonderful ball wrangler. :D
You like that illustration? WAIT, THERE'S MOAR #klyeart !!!!
The fact that @klye is not yet a millionaire is proof enough that Steemit has a problem
:)
Upvoted for bawls.
Damn they look a lot like mah balls man!
Blue?
INDEED!
Interesting points. And I do agree. It's like the steemit version of "the rich get richer". My question is how to do this? How do you elevate the genius of a minnow to get the right attention?
Ideally, the (pseudo-objective) value of the (subjective) content is decided by the people, through genuine Upvotes and comments. The problem is that most Upvotes are not genuine, but a result of gaming.
The problem is that most genuine upvotes (of the commons) aren't worth shit.
I'm not sure I would agree that Minnows votes are any more genuine than those with more SP. I think people across the spectrum of Steem Power are probably trying to game the curation system for financial gain.
It's hard to be a minnow on Steemit.
Agree with that! Is the path from minnow (with greater steam power) better developed through meaningful commentary and replies rather than simply up voting? Again, though, who decides on quality?
I certainly have no problem with the existence of poverty and wealth, not in the real world or any virtual construct. My article is to point out how the current system is not incentivising "sincere curation".
and I agree @hallie123. You're up against it until you have a lot of SP.
I fully agree with your statement!
TYVM. I hope the system is tweaked over time to become fairer. It really is in everyones best interests IMO. The only losers would be lazy curators, who would have to work harder. That's fine with me.
Interesting, I think we're onto the same problem from but from slightly different angles. I've just written up my thoughts and suggestions about it:
https://steemit.com/steem/@orly/how-to-fix-the-extreme-inequality-on-steem
I'll have a look now :)
A good curator will go through countless posts in new category, so it's not only about the "top travel bloggers" ;)
Absolutely. But at the moment there is no incentive to do that, and few people on Steemit do anything out of the goodness of their hearts. So in my opinion, they should be better compensated for taking the risk of "backing an outsider." That outsider indeed would most likely be only happy to sacrifice more of the posts earnings, just to have the opportunity of breaking out of the "Minnow Trap".
You are soooo right! Loved your post! Yesterday cyclop posted a picture of a beach, thats it no story ! And instantly hit over 1,700.00! In photography now its way past that! Its getting ridiculous! So i posted the same thing beach photos from the Okanagan, even nicer then his, ! You know what i got? 0 ! Well actually someone did give me their 2 cents worth! lol! 😂😂😂
@condra, @rhi-marie and I have been discussing this. What if there was a valueless vote, something unattached to your "Steem" vote, that you could just use to say...dare I say it..."I LIKE this" without investing your daily voting power. These likes, coupled with the "Steem" votes and the page views for a post could be used to help push the post up the list. If everyone had an equal, valueless like to give whenever they want, perhaps the content on the front page wouldn't be just popular authors whose posts are know to give good curation rewards. The curation system IS flawed right now as people are just scrolling the new feed, trying to find popular authors to support in exchange for a quick buck. But if, while scrolling along you could still tell the world what you like, while saving your "Steem" vote for the evil task of filling your wallet, a more well rounded representation of what's interesting would rise to the top.
Does this make sense? I think @rhi-marie is going to make a post about this. So check out her blog,
And also, if people want to help diversify content, head on over to the #steemittalentcompetition and give it a read. @condra, this is a great, thanks for your support in the past and I love to read what you have to say. followed
Hi! This post has a Flesch-Kincaid grade level of 9.0 and reading ease of 66%. This puts the writing level on par with Michael Crichton and Mitt Romney.
Excellent post!