WritCoin - Creative Proof of Brain
View this post on Hive: WritCoin - Creative Proof of Brain
6 years ago in #utopian-io by raj808 (71)
$38.73
- Past Payouts $38.73, 0.00 TRX
- - Author $29.42, 0.00 TRX
- - Curators $9.31, 0.00 TRX
I've really been enjoying moderating posts written in answer to the @sndbox challenge in association with Utopian. Both because they bring in interesting and unique ideas, and because they've drawn in a high caliber of writers. We've got some great minds writing Utopian blogposts, but many of them are not, by inclination, writers.
I find the ideas presented here interesting. In my day job, I am a tiny publisher and translator, and I'm always looking for the next place technology will take the publishing industry. And this is certainly an intriguing potential direction.
As one would expect from a writer, this post was well written. I did have some small nits to pick with it, in terms of style and grammar. A couple of examples:
"From the outside looking in, it seems it is attempting to be all of the above, and I sincerely hope that it succeeds in this multimedia model, but history shows that focus is one of the keys to a successful enterprise." This is a very, very, very long sentence. It would have worked better as two: "From the outside looking in, it seems it is attempting to be all of the above. I sincerely hope that it succeeds in this multimedia model, but history shows that focus is one of the keys to a successful enterprise."
"This is important because the content is the face of steemit, at the moment a mainstream publishing professional looking in at the trending pages would be far from impressed." This sentence looks like it may have gone through an aborted edit? It would also benefit from being broken up. There's no need for the part after "Steemit" (which should have been capitalized) to be in the same sentence.
"In this scenario community candidates would have to be vetted based on past content and reputation on steemit" really needs a comma after "scenario."
In my work as a Utopian moderator, I offer edit proposals in accordance to the writing quality of the post. This are issues I might not have commented on in 90% of the posts I moderate, because there would be more egregious issues. But with a higher quality of writing comes a higher standard in editing.
Your contribution has been evaluated according to Utopian policies and guidelines, as well as a predefined set of questions pertaining to the category.
To view those questions and the relevant answers related to your post, click here.
Need help? Write a ticket on https://support.utopian.io/.
Chat with us on Discord.
[utopian-moderator]
Your edits were all valid @didic and I have corrected those issues. Thanks for your time evaluating the post and I'm glad it held some personal interest in regards to your career in publishing/translation.
I feel like it could be the beginning of an idea which can grow into a working project. Many thanks for your feedback :-)
Thank you for your review, @didic!
So far this week you've reviewed 6 contributions. Keep up the good work!
Hey, @raj808!
Thanks for contributing on Utopian.
We’re already looking forward to your next contribution!
Get higher incentives and support Utopian.io!
Simply set @utopian.pay as a 5% (or higher) payout beneficiary on your contribution post (via SteemPlus or Steeditor).
Want to chat? Join us on Discord https://discord.gg/h52nFrV.
Vote for Utopian Witness!
Most of all, I appreciate your analysis about the current situation and the fact that we're at a crossroad. The greed of the crowd can be worse and more merciless than that of an elite, and in the end what do we get here on steemit nowadays?.. from a crowd based proof of brain aren't we heading to an elitarian oligarchy based on a proof of lobbying? If this is the direction, the coin will soon loose what is the first prerogative for all coins, virtual or not: trust that creates liquidity (and, without that, the castle ruins down). Your token is a great concept @raj808. I just wish it will find a way to not become another lobby-coin.
Thanks for reading @f3nix I'm glad you enjoyed the analysis. I think that, due to the decentralized nature of steemit, it is up to us to try and find the solutions to these problems that you express so well in your comment:
I'm not sure yet the full concept of writcoin but I'm gonna keep developing these concepts, even if only in my head for now :-)
Keep developing them @raj808, I feel that you're on something here!
Hi @raj808!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your post is eligible for our upvote, thanks to our collaboration with @utopian-io!
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server
Congratulations @raj808! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPDo not miss the last post from @steemitboard:
This is an interesting idea, but it seems to be limited to publishers that might want to publish anthologies. Multi-author anthologies don't do as well as single-author works, so I would not expect publishers to jump on this. However, if they can see the long-term value of nurturing writing talent, then they might.
One thing publishers are looking for is writers with a solid platform. That means they are interested in writers who can network and build an audience. It isn't just writing ability any more. In fact, some of the most popular works published today show little in the way of quality of writing standards (ever try reading "Fifty Shades of Grey?"). Publishers want sell-able manuscripts, and that really has little to do with quality.
Like banking, the publishing industry is slow to change. How long did it take them to get on board with the idea of e-books? Almost a decade. Then they priced them so high that readers were better off just buying a paperback. Many publishers still price their e-books near the price of their print books. That's because they don't really want to sell the e-book.
An SMT for writers might go over well with publishers if they can see a way to influence the path of the writing. They see themselves as the purveyors of talent. They see themselves as bringing talent and readers together, so an SMT that is geared toward facilitating that process would be much more valuable. Although, I do like the idea of using the SMT to wade out spammers, scammers, and plagiarists.
On a final note, I'd like to see something like this for indie publishers. This is the market I think is more likely to get on board with something like this, as opposed to traditional publishing houses. If you can get Hugh Howey and Joanna Penn on board, all the other self-published authors will jump in.
I completely understand what you're saying here but single-author works, i.e. collections of short stories or poems, don't have as stringent first publishing rights, as I understand it. If a publisher decides to print a collection, they are less concerned about if it has been previously published online, whereas every journal/anthology I've looked at recently specifies FPR. This idea is very much trying to bring publicity to steemit as well as bringing second-life to stories/poems people may have published here. Anthologies would promote the platform and also build a higher appreciation of creative writing among the higher-ups as the more cynical 'investment' minded people would see that these fields are bringing attention to steemit. In regards to the publishing houses, yes you raise a valid point some type of incentive for them needs to be part of it. I'm quite decent at drumming up PR storm when I get my head in the game 😉
Also, if this idea were to get developed, it is partly to make some type of mechanism whereby creative writing works can simply be rewarded proportionally higher than they seem to be now. Payout-wise, creative writing posts can be abysmal here on steemit and not proportional to the quality of the writing, as you point out happens in the wider world of writing also.
Interesting point, although it wouldn't bring as much mainstream attention. But there is no reason why loads of different paths shouldn't be explored equally, it's an idea well worth thinking about. Thanks for your insightful and valuable comment @blockurator :-)
I like the way you're thinking about this, actually. It's certainly a problem looking for a solution. I'd definitely agree with that. I'm wracking my brains trying to figure out what it would look like, practically.
I've thought about this a bit more and I could see how something like this could work. If the focus is on magazines, journals, and other publications that want first publishing rights, there could be a way to incentivize these publishers to give up this right in an exclusive, limited way using an SMT. I see it having some similar characteristics of resources already on the market, but not on a blockchain.
There are other submission tracking services out there, but to keep this simple, I'll use these two to illustrate how you can incentive the submission process as well as approvals and rejections and, to top it off, further incentivize publishers to allow a submission to be published on Steemit while it awaits publication in print.
Here's how it could work:
The biggest drawback I see to this is, after posting to Steemit, you can't stop some other publisher from stealing the content and republishing it elsewhere. Otherwise, I see built-in incentives for publishers and writers with this kind of system.
What do you think?
Give me a few days to properly assess/digest all of the ideas you've put forth here blockurator. I'm away from home this weekend so I'm not gonna have much spare time for computer/internet :-)
You give us here a great idea and some very interesting food for thought!
In my humble opinion, the basic problem of Steemit platform is that it's like a market where everyone is a seller.
In a "normal" demand and supply structure, there are some people that provide something, in this case creative writing, and some other, hopefully more, people that enjoys this content, giving a fee in return.
In Steemit, every account is a content creator (quality may vary), and a reward gatherer.
This leads to the current situation, in which the ability to use the mechanism to gather more reward pays more than the quality of the content created.
I do not see easy solutions, if not apply a strict code of ethics and set a good example, but this will not stop the "crafty" behavior.
My two cents! ;)
Thanks for reading @marcoriccardi I'm glad this article provided food for thought. I think that, due to the decentralized nature of steemit, it is up to us to try and find the solutions to these problems.
In Steemit, every account is a content creator (quality may vary), and a reward gatherer.
The point you raise is valid. I'm not sure yet how the concept of writcoin could help but I'm gonna keep developing these concepts, even if only in my head for now :-)
Hey Raj it has been too long! I have seen the struggles of other writers who saw a way out of that hungry young artist that plagues creatives but only saw the trending with memes, average content self voted to the top and bid bots being used to boost copy pasted content.
A lot of these talented people tried their best and networked, found themselves in communities but in the end left because they were not eligible for curie votes anymore and the people who engaged with them were minnows and red fishes sho while socially brought so much value to the engagement a less than 1 dollar reward for something well writing pressures and disheartens the person.
The SMT that you are thinking might be a ticket to get more creative writers back in the platform.
Hi @maverickinvictus good to see you agian bro, it has been too long you're right. I'm gonna head over your blog for some gaming fun tomorrow ;-)
What you say here is so right... it is savage on steemit sometimes when you're relying on the quality of content when the simple fact is that it is probably less than 1% chance a whale or dolphin will read and reward you on an ongoing basis due to the quality of your content, even if it is exceptional. This means, as you say, there is a point where even curie will stop voting those exceptional authors based on how long they have been around (rep etc).
If I manage to get writcoin developed then I want to mitigate against this problem in one of the most unfairly under rewarded areas of writing on steemit, creative writing. This isn't just cause I write a lot of fiction & poetry though ;-) I honestly want this platform to flourish with high level creative works and I have literally witnessed great talent leave or reduce the work they put out because they are not getting any tangible reward for work that is of a mainstream publishable standard.
Anyway, I'm not sure yet exactly how the concept of writcoin could help but I'm gonna keep developing these concepts, even if only in my head for now :-)
I'm always so so excited if I think what SMT's will make possible on the platform. Like, really excited. I believe so many undervalued little communities will start to flourish and suddenly find their own crownd with a dedicated 'economy'.
This was a great write-up and a good example of what start to happen next year!
I really hope so too and believe it can be the answer or at least the path to solutions. Thanks for reading @soyrosa I'm glad this article provided food for thought :-)
I like reading blog posts like this. More of an idea than, this is what I have read or what I know :)
This seems like it would fit well with the idea of a 'good person' token, or a 'good writer' token. To prove this is the case, you need a history, some credentials, as it were.
Thanks for sharing the idea, I hope others contribute also.
Thanks for the feedback @abh12345
Yeah, I did think that regulating this would be the most challenging aspect. Maybe not right now as steemit is quiet and I feel like I know around 30-40 names who wouldn't even need reviewing as their writing speaks for itself, but if it were as busy as it were in November last year it would take some serious work to keep the scammers out. It is the part of the idea that I haven't puzzled out completely yet.
The idea was that people would have to hold the SMT token as a stake to be part of the community, which is part of how it would regulate, but to keep the community relevant as a creative writers hub it would probably need manual verification of each new member. Kind of like what we have to do as curie curators, vet work for quality, plagiarism, genuine account confirmation etc.
Anyway, sowing seeds at the moment. Lets see what grows :-)