RE: An Open Letter to the Steemit Powers that Be
Good post. Serious issue indeed. Riding the wave of popularity and the feedback of minnows voting for the popular personalities and the whales bots copying those trends and the minnows voting for what the whales for for... LOL... all to cash in as well... everyone just wants to cash in and keep or increase their holdings, while quality that matters goes out the window....
I have tried to address to goal in the White Papers of meaningful quality content and get people to focus on that instead of making-money and popularity bandwagon jumping for the free ride... The voting is over, but I made it to try to get things to change here and get the quality up for Steemit's success... Steemit Succeeds if We Make it Succeed - Analysis to Help Yourself and Steemit Grow in Quality
Take care. Peace.
@krnel, thanks for the upvote , taking the time to read my post and commenting. I enjoyed your earlier post. Unfortunately while we, as humans know we need to produce quality and it will take time to get a return, immediate returns are what drive us because of the innate understanding of the time value of money.
Honestly, I think if voting periods and payout periods were shortened, it would fix 90 percent of the problem because it would force people to work on all sides. Curators would have to truly evaluate content to find the next big thing, writers would have to push out more because of truncated schedules, but the focus on creating quality would rule because that's what whales need to score large paydays.
Unfortunately, as I said in my earlier comment, I hope that a concerned whale who sees the bigger picture or one of he developers would look at the numbers, see the story and the larger picture and do the right thing, but I am unconvinced this moves up from under the pile of "trending" content.
Good idea. That would cut the huge pile ups of upvotes that increase the payout and force more quality to come out if people wanted to get more from it. But then the posting of articles would need to be even more timed for visibility since the timeframe would be reduced and less opportunity to have people recognize the content as well... pros and cons...
Given that they want this to be an anarchic setup, I think changes will be slow if they come because they want the community to make the changes together... this is a problem since we don't have the power to change how the community functions at the coded fixed level of opration, only the "mayor" developers and the "council" of witnesses can make such changes in how the platform works at the coded level of operation. I hope they pay attention to the issues and are working to modify the operational aspect of the system itself.
The whole idea of when posts are released is at the very heart of digital advertising. Some of he key metrics I remember from my days in the space was not only bounce rates and open rates, but also when offer were opened, or in this case, when logs were read. We would then optimize wen the offer sets would be released for maximum impact. It's how marketing as a whole is run.
The point of reducing vote time is to disadvantage the whole set it and forget it bot scheme, and encourage engagement. This should have a knock off effect of a more social social media (commenting, conversations, content and so on). One small change can do so much.
Will the change cause people to be upset? Absolutely. You are taking away an easy, almost guaranteed stream of income from people who are passively contributing. Now, they would be required to engage, but it's what I believe is required for the long term viability of the site.