You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Vote for this simple change to the UI & Take the dollar a vote pledge!
I've had it in mind to put some of my posts to be paid 100% Steempower but I've forgotten to check it every time. I get so invested in creating my post it really becomes an afterthought.
Me, too. Every. Single. Time.
Yeah that's exactly why I opened the issue. Would you mind heading over to github and leaving this comment there as well?
https://github.com/steemit/steemit.com/issues/358
What I said above is a true experience but I think for most people starting out they would view the behavior as somewhat "scammy" if 100% payout were locked in by default. It's something they will be unfamiliar with until they go into more depth about the platform. I actually think it would be a poor move.
However a user setting that would toggle your default 100% steempower on/off with the default set to off initially would have my support.
I kind of agree.
It should default to on, but when you click Post, it should say,
Ohhh I really like that option perhaps best of all!
Can you stick that up on github for consideration as well?
Go to github and voice it, but I think maybe it would be best with defaulting to "on" and then we just let them know at sign up what the tradeoffs are.
I agree with @dgiors on the "scammy" aspect. Every new user who signs up and finds out that they can't actually withdraw any of the earnings even when there was an explanation they were supposed to read and understand but didn't is not only a pissed-off new user but also bad PR.
I can see what you're saying @smooth but what about adding a prompt like @rubellitefae is saying?
I mean there is literally no difference if it's default off between that and what we have now. But honestly if we can encourage saving vs spending it will be way better for the platform IMHO. We obviously don't want to alienate new users, but to my mind it makes sense to read and understand that by default your money goes to a savings account that you can draw down like an annuity.
But I think the prompt is a nice balance.
I agree too! This could give STEEM a boost!
There should be a video tutorial, I think that would help with onboarding new users.
This was supposed to be posted on your "Voting is a Popularity Contest Thread," but it got frozen before I could hit "post." :( So many problems with "steemit.com" it makes me want to break off and make my own forum (my lack of programming ability stops me, for now). In any case, I hope Steem improves, so I will probably "keep giving it another chance" since the mission appears to have benevolent goals.
The books on emergence that I've recommended in my posts are a great thing to read before attempting to design such a thing. First and foremost, "The Wisdom of Crowds" by Surowiecki, and "Out of Control" by Kevin Kelly. ...There's no reason that Steemit can't be what the entire internet was designed to be: a place where people can find the content that is best suited to them, and the most intelligent, most-relevant-to-all, most-amazing content can be generally regarded as such ...by those who care about it.
The goal is to have the machine learning specialists and engineers upvote AGI articles, and to have those looking for "cool shark pictures" not have much to say about the AGI design articles. (Unless it's to upvote them because they're written at a sufficient level to inspire the masses.) One way to accomplish this is to allow individuals to add reading lists to keywords. A "keyword"+"reading list associated with the keyword" allows one to find others who know the same things about the keyword, or define it the same way.
One can still search only the reading lists, or only the keyword, or combine both.
This way, a person who has read "Ecologies of Computation" and a bunch of white papers on machine learning doesn't get bogged down talking to people who have only read laymen's articles on the subject. ...And it will also mean that their votes should count for way more.
If I'm talking about the ideas implied by the Singularity with someone who's never read a book by Vinge, Kurzweil, Wiener, Drexler, Freitas, Moravec, etc., then that person should have less to say about up or down-ranking me ...but only on that subject. If I decide to put my "cool shark pictures" online, then "specialized vote filtering" is no longer necessary, and every Tom, Dick, and Harriet with an opinion should be able to vote.
The prior is just one way of optimizing the use of keywords and reading lists to assess quality.
Posted my sentiments on Github. Thanks for pointing the way.
You're welcome! Thanks for the dialog!