You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why upvoting someone for Their Resteems or Quick Remarks can be a Big Mistake‼️ 🚩
Well said @droucil. I have not been on Steemit very long but I have noticed exactly what you mention about re-steeming. I've been here two weeks and have re-steemed one post that I thought was of value to the community.
People should value their upvotes and re-steeming ability , other wise it will just dilute what is trying to be built here, which is to create value for good content.
Until next time,
@sultnpapper
ps: no up-voted desired , just expressing my thoughts
Like you I am a newbie to Steemit, though not to writing or professional communities. It seems that some up-voting is being done by ‘robots’ (computers executing programmed algorithms). IF this impression is correct, I feel that we should ask the authors of these programs to explain why they benefit the community, unless they have already done so and now could not simply provide the URLs. I'm not saying they do not benefit the community; but am only asking for the explanation, which at this point I do not have and would like to see.
Also, an up vote that is associated with text that exposits what things about the article the commentator thought were helpful or stimulative of questions that need to be raised brings much more value to the community than the “empty up-vote” or even the ubiquitous "great-article" comment.
Thus, some 7 to 10 days after an article has appeared and has garnered significant commentary of the kind just cited, the author should go back over the comments and identify the ones that seem to significantly add value to the package of communication that comprises the original post plus the comments.
The authors of these selected comments should either receive a special up-vote or the author of the post should recommend to the “Editorial Board” that they be awarded tokens not unlike those offered to curators.
The contributions of the curators are without doubt valuable; but when people sit down and significantly add value to a post with their extended commentary, that too can benefit the community in important ways. An accumulation of these idea-rich commentaries produces valuable enrichment of the website. After a while, the set of these commentaries will help to raise Steemit to a higher level of quality as a source of helpful information.
Yes, there is a bunch of bot up voting taking place. I not computer savvy, but have been paying attention to a couple things that look like questionable practices going on in this community. All of which are just meant to extract wealth out of the community. I 'm still learning so I couldn't offer an answer if an explanation has been given about bot votes adding benefit to the community.
For someone that is just new you pick things up rather quickly.
Upvote bots are a common thing on Steemit, it has its up and downs, the downside mostly being a phenonom called "circle jerking", in which the same authors are upvoted for the best curation rewards. Actually might have an article you mind find interesting concerning this issue: https://steemit.com/curation/@thecryptofiend/the-curation-conundrum
As for the comment engagement I totally agree. Right now upvotes are mostly concentrated on articles, and I think this should be balanced out more. However, waiting a week before upvoting comments wouldn't really be a good option in my opinion. Because it would make the engagement less, seeing that after 7 days a post's payout is already done, leaving the comment section to a dead zone.
Thank you for your informative comment and URL droucil, and apologies for my late reply. Only today did I learn where to go to keep track of replies. I guess I got lazy from all my forum services which arrange to have an email messages sent to you when there are replies.
haha :P Seems like you still got some things to learn then ;)
Couldn't agree more with those words!
ps: you're still getting an upvote