You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: 'Interesting' content > Trending?
I don't think there's any way to achieve that without using human curation.
So, why not implement human curation on the bids before the votes? A Newspaper doesn't let any advertiser advertise regardless of content. They are all filtered before publishing as what they print is their responsibility which is the problem with the bidbots currently; high reward, close to zero responsibility.
It's slowly heading in that direction, but you have to understand that this is entirely controlled by the delegators, not the bot operators like myself. If I just go ahead and implement human curation and as a result reduce the delegators' returns then they can just turn around and move their SP to someone who doesn't give a shit which I think would be a lot worse for everyone.
So I have to take slow, careful steps to try to improve things and encourage others to do the same along with me or else we could end up in a much worse situation.
Also regarding your newspaper analogy, in this case the "newspaper" is really steemit.com, and they do allow any advertiser to advertise regardless of content. I can't change that. I take slow, careful steps to try to improve things, like i said, with the understanding that my delegations can disappear at any time, for any reason, and then you'll have someone new to deal with, who, my guess is, will not be as open to discussion and change as I, and many of the other bot operators, currently are.
I do concede it is partly the problem of the decentralized 'newspaper' called steemit.com that are not helping themselves at present by letting anything have the chance to appear on the home page - If we look at amazon listing products, surely these adverts for products are vetted before being listed?
If I go to amazon to buy something, I'll look at the reviewer comments and rating of the product by said reviewers before deciding which option to go for. This seems loosely like 'account based' voting - and the money in your bank account doesn't mean you can give more stars than 5.
Sadly, it seems we're not going to have the option to sort by single account votes here in the near future - and of course it could be gamed anyway. So are we looking at an amalgamation of votes, comment quality, engagement, reputation of voter/commentator, some key words like 'interesting', 'excellent', to give an overall score for the article?
It's not going to be easy to solve this!
Yeah, I can understand that view.
But, this is like flagging, it is up to the community and currently, the community resources are largely pooled into bidbot delegations so the majority of content choice power lays with where the power lays.
So, why are we creating investment opportunities and hoping to attract investors who don't care about the community at all?
Totally.
Matt has mentioned continuous improvement, for me this is a whitelist (list the whole of Steem bar the current blacklist), and manual checks on bids (perhaps over a trendable sized bid), for starters.
We currently have an extensive blacklist and also a whitelist for accounts allowed to bid over 50 SBD/STEEM.
The Blacklist just looks like job creation for the boys - add 15 names a day to a post and upvote to $100. I've just this morning sent 250 or so accounts to Patrice and it only took 20 minutes or so.
Surely just whitelisting everyone not blacklisted already is the way to go?
The bots are maxed out at present so I don't think income is a problem
A weekly call for whitelist additions could be put out - as an advert.
I'm thinking the accounts that need advertising @deepdives, @musing, @creativecrypto, @hyperfundit.com, etc from trending have existing Steem accounts that know the drill already and so they would come to you first, or know how to contact someone to be whitelisted sharpish.
And if the bids start falling away (I really don't see an issue with this at present!) then send the bot curation teams out to go look. The last time I queried new posts by new accounts for the previous day, it took about 10 mins to check who produced anything of reasonable quality or not.
Hey abh12345, great post and I agree the "Trending" is more like "Promoted" or "Adverts and Circle Jerked content" lol
I think human curation is part of the solution, but there needs to be a second layer that's detailed to the specific user's experience. It would be ideal if steemit asked "what are your interests" upon logging in the first time, like many sites do; but they don't so could this be developed by say the @busy.org team?
I've also been thinking, it's the same 50 or so accounts that takes the top three on a rotational basis. What if someone were to build an app/extension that can hide author posts? Then each reader can decide for themselves, what is worthy of trending for themselves.
Just throwing some thoughts out here, what do you think?
(I just took a chance with bidbots and it's been working out, I don't actually know anyone from high up)