Worth it or not? Lessons from Zuckerberg
Facebook originally started off as a Hot or Not site where they rated pictures of Harvard students side by side. Keeping it classy as always Zuckerberg but, he might have been onto something.
What I was wondering about is this line in the Hivemind list.
- voting/polls (democratic or burn/send to vote)
Do you see where I might go with this?
As you know, I am a massive fan of bidbots. Huge fan. The biggest. Everyone says so....
People see a post upvoted to the moon but they know that most of that value has been paid for in SBD. This gives pause to flag it as the poster could incur a very large loss. What people tend to forget however is that all of that value came out of the public pool.
When all of it comes out of the pool, the number one reason for flagging comes into play.
- Disagreement on rewards
One can't factor in the cost of ordering the bots because that goes to the bot owners, not into the pool itself. That means the disagreement of rewards must be the post held up against the value of that post. Not, the post held up against the value minus cost of votes.
The reason is that from a community perspective, the entire amount has been removed from the pool available for all other posts, yet, none of those other posts have access to any of that SBD used to buy it. This means that regardless of the cost of ordering, the post needs to be rewarded on what the community thinks it is worth, not on what the bidder votes it to. Currently though, there is no real way to effectively do this.
There is stigma with flagging, especially the small accounts flagging a post that is sitting in the trending section. So, what if we Zuckerberg bidbot voted posts?
Worth it or Not?
An app could list bidbot voted posts in the last 12 hours before their payout and users could then see the posts, order them based on tags or content, read them and decide if a joke post, meme or some random selfie is worth over 800 dollars. perhaps with a dedicated app for it, it might take away the stigma.
Remember, they could also upvote that post even more too. It doesn't have to be only flagging. Perhaps all of those small users who are currently getting negative returns on their bids will actually get some eyes on their work as they have wanted and those eyes will boost their posts into the positive if they are worthy.
Of course, it could go a bit further though couldn't it? The community poll function could potentially be used to create a trail of upvotes or flags on individual posts.
The bidbot post gets advertised and a poll is created to get public opinion on whether the post is indeed Worth it or Not? The poll results come in.
Some potential ideas:
All votes/flags are cast into the app. If more people think it is worth it, the value will actually increase but, if many think it isn't then, it will decrease. This would of course not be a blind vote/flag on the actual post.
There could be a flagging bot that after tallying the votes, would apply a flag that would take way all profits for the poster and a little extra as punishment. That way, the actual flaggers would remain anonymous. People don't like anonymous flags but the blockchain allows bidbots and anonymous is okay too.
It could be compared to a similar article by a different author, perhaps one who is known for producing decent content consistently. That way people could see what the difference in payout is between the two and decide what is actually worth it. If a decent piece is worth 5 yet the bidbot one has 500 on it, that is 100 times more coming out of the pool. That is 100 authors who could have potentially written a quality piece for 5 dollars, but, the money was just not available in the pool for such things.
It could be used by @steemcleaners to easily find the spam posts that have ordered bidbots and @patrice and her team could just click through and flag as their heart desires. Or by curation projects on their slow days.
This isn't about flagging though, this is about community governance and incentivizing higher quality posts that are worth the value they take from the pool. Of course, this could be used for any post but all of the other posts are supported somewhat organically by accounts, not rewarded by the author themselves.
Supposedly, men add on average 1 centimeter to their penis size when giving a 'self-reported' measurement for statistical purposes. No surprises there. What do they say their post is actually worth when there are no scientific studies involved then?
Now, another feature that could supplement this is:
- modlists: (e.g. spam, abuse, bad taste)
Imagine that? Worth it or Not? could become a community tool to create automated blacklists for the bots, limitations on upvote level, temporary bans, retractions of votes even, automated flags for abuse; Think of the possibilities.
And then:
- rich statistics
We could all see how all of it is playing out in the numbers.
There are going to be so many options with communities, so many possibilities. I wonder where it will all lead and whether I will be able to give enough ideas that some Devs will create a few apps to test the waters. After all, it should be easier then.
I wish I could program... I am unfortunately one of those people who struggles to set the clock on the microwave.
This post is likely to get 5 dollars. Worth it or not? Dunno, but a bidbot won't be called on it. I have my own stake here that I use but, I prefer the community decide how big it can actually get ... for scientific purposes of course.
Taraz
[ a Steemit original ]
I like the general idea, but I wonder how this would work in practice. Think about the volume of posts we're talking about considering. Who is reading all these posts to decided whether it deserves the amount it got? I don't think you can automate that. It's too subjective. And what if people don't like a certain topic, and think the idea is FOS no matter how well written a piece is? I must confess that I wouldn't think a piece promoting Bitconnect back in its day was worth a high reward pool amount no matter how many words were used or how solid the writing quality was. Others may feel that way about my posts on spirituality, because they may believe that only science is real. So how do you get this to be a fair system?
This isn't automated, it is based on a voting mechanism and polls by users.
It takes a bot to beat a bot.. or it takes a strong community to band together to not accept bot voting and remove it from our platform no matter what it takes.
If you truly care for the future of the platform, you'll put in the time and effort (like @tarazkp has done) and work to make it a better place!
"Time and effort" required is the question. Let's not pretend that caring or not is black and white. There are quite a few shades of grey in there. So my question remains, how much can this actually be automated? Because if it can't be I wonder how many people are far enough along the time commitment spectrum needed to make this actually work manually. You can moralize all you want, but in the end regardless of how much you think people SHOULD be willing to invest of their time in making it work, it will either work or it won't.
It's up to each person how much time and effort that they can spend. There's no standard number because everyone uses Steemit at varying levels and has varying amounts of time.
Time and effort could be educating new users to not use bidbot in the first place. Why regulate when you can educate? And for the remaining stubborn individuals, the community can "more forcefully" educate them.
Steemit can prove the self-regulation idea of Blockchain, or it can perpetuate the need for a central authority to control everything. If you're not willing to work and take responsibility, you are failing to understand the fundamental purpose and benefits of a Blockchain.
Simply saying "but that's too hard" and being a naysayer is the wrong attitude. Act and be the change that you want to see.
This would be a really cool app. If there was an anonymous downvote bot that totaled all the votes then placed the vote that would be great. Heck if dmania's spam is worth delegating millions in SP towards think something like this should be too. Bet this would be very addictive to people.
indeed, would just need a little bit of a coder and some testing
I'll beta test it!! Wish I knew this type of coding. Can make you a blog (one that functions as a blog and static website even) on wordpress, but that is about it anymore. Honestly I could skin steemit better then is here, but that is a whole other issue. It would have so much more useful info, think steemworld all built right into your backend pages. It's crazy we need to run all over to get details that should be right here.
That is one bot I would like to see. I know one T/A who won't though. Actually there are 2 of them. Second one not as bad but still $250 a day for posting crap.
yes, both could do with a little bump but of course, they could get even more ;)
Honestly doubt it. There is another T/A who knows what he is doing and says it as it is. Has helped me quite a bit already and he is making 1c - 5c a post. Does the graphs but doesn't do video. Will do one specifically for what coins you are holding or thinking of holding. Check him out. Andriustovis a Lithuanian chap.
$5? It is already at $12. :)
Community ;)
I like this idea! There are many practical issues to sort out but I'm generally more in favor of active action against abusers rather than simply encouraging everyone not to abuse.
I assume the app could have multiple order options but the most useful one for me would be to sort based on payout or, if possible, amount paid to bidbots. This way, we can better utilize the time we spend reviewing and voting for posts that have the biggest impact on the reward pool.
I am pretty sure it is possible based on the known bots at least.
A nice counter plan. If taken to the extreme and apply somewhat of a Grumpycat touch where all votebot posts were flagged to the amount it would have been without them would quickly scare off those who use them. It is evident those who own the bots will never stop their profit operations. I know many dislike Grumpycat, but if one is honest he/she has probably stopped most people from using bots that vote posts older than 3.5 days. I imagine applying this to all voting bots would have the same outcome. Of course, those abusing the voting bots are easily found as they dominate the top of the lists.
They are easy to find but hard to act upon it seems. everyone loves the idea of making and playing games, so gamify flagging ;)
As someone who uses Smartsteem (I'm whitelisted there) to buy votes in order to get my posts noticed, I would be very supportive of an app like this! It's very disheartening to see so much spam get upvoted by bots when I'm spending time and effort on mine.
My aim is to one day have my art have such a following that I just won't need to buy votes anymore.
Ugh, I hate smugsteem. Such a scammy bidbot...
Why do you say so? I personally don't use their bidbot but have heard it is better than other bots who don't care about what type of content is upvoted by them.
I'm confused. I thought your first post stated that you use smartsteem to buy votes.. then you're saying you don't use the bidbot? So how do you buy votes?
They have a bidbot, but you can also buy votes directly from them (they have a service that let's people sell their vote to them). So you send SBD to Smartmarket, and get votes from people who have sold their vote to them.
If you honestly think that, using bots is killing your chances most likely. Many people don't vote or follow bot users and the list is growing.
This is something I've been worried about for some time... What is the most effective, organic way of getting your posts noticed, would you say? Good old networking?
Although if you app idea really takes hold, users with great quality content shouldn't need to worry about using bots, right?
Thing is, buying votes right now is slowly increasing my Steem Power, and that's hard to let go of.
Of course things can really become interesting with hivemind and creating flagging poles is revolutionary. Thank you for the ideas
"The Public Pool is funded by the stake holders"
So, I control exactly my share of the "stake". I can allocate it with my votes, or I can rent it, lend it or sell it.
When I place a bid, I am hoping to bid well enough to purchase someone else's stake allocation. Someone who isn't currently using their stake, and they have the right to rent, sell, trade it. Because they own it.
Someone else built a tool which makes this a simple on chain solution.
While I completely agree we have some issues, I completely reject the idea that the community which isn't invested for the most part has a "Claim" to the stake. :)
Just a point of view for consideration. I am not saying everyone is making the best decisions with their stake, but it is absolutely their stake to do with what they want.
Yes it is their stake to do with what they want, You are right. And it would be the same in this scenario also wouldn't it?
My Oh my, you've shared a lot of beautiful ideas and suggestions on how to curb the undeniable oppression that already exist from the raping of reward pool by some authors whose contents most times do not match with the outrageous rewards accumulated.
Worth it or not?
If you would ask me, I would say that this post is worth $50 and above. Well done for painting the truth