@Curie - Meet The Witnesses #32
With the tagline of “Discovering new promising authors on Steemit since August 2016,” Curie is the best-known curation force on the Steemit platform. The size of Curie's vote, as you may have noticed above, is also sufficient to the herculean task the Curie group takes on in /New every day.
Curie runs a curation guild on Streemian, so that when Curie votes on an author, a large group of trailing voters also do as well. In practice, this means that anyone touched by the benevolent, upvoting hand of Curie can expect to see a boost in rewards of up to $250 or more (at the current Steem price) BEFORE the trailing voters also chip in! Reputation jumps from the 30's to the 50's are not unusual.
Anyone can submit posts to Curie for inclusion in Curie’s daily voting and resteeming quota. Users who submit posts that get selected each earn a 10 Steem finder’s fee, making this a very promising secondary income for curating minnows! Not only can you vote early on a post and see a high curation payout if the Curie guild selects it, but you will also get the finder’s fee if approved!
To ensure this system is not gamed, Curie tracks acceptance rate for each submitter. A high acceptance rate can lead to bonuses in finder’s fees, while a low one can disqualify you from submission Quality is emphasized over quantity.
There are also a sequence of guidelines that must be followed for posts to be eligible for Curie: new authors only (there is a reputation cap), no reposts, proper citations, post age (2.5 hours - 24 hours), payout cap ($2), limited author repetition, and finally, none of the following tags: “Politics, Steemit, IntroduceYourself, Photography, Travel, or Religious”.
Yours truly was lucky enough to have not one, but two, of my early posts Curie’d. It is certainly an exceptional feeling to go from making 60 cents a post to over $300. Without this early boost of motivation, and a confirmation that the Steemit platform was capable of identifying and rewarding talent, I can’t say for sure if I would have persevered here through a number of price drops and activity lulls!
For this alone, Curie has my enormous gratitude, and is at least a little responsible for this very article you are reading now.
Curie holds 115,000 SP and is powering down.
Curie’s Current Witness Update: https://steemit.com/curation/@curie/curie-weekly-update-17th-september-to-24th-september-2017
Curie’s Original Witness Thread: https://steemit.com/curation/@curie/curie-weekly-update-26th-dec-2016-to-1st-jan-2017-special-edition
Curie Chat Channel: https://steemit.chat/channel/curie
If you have any additions or errata for this post, please let me know! I will see that they are voted to the top of the comments, and will make the appropriate edits (if possible).
We also have a Radio Station! (click me)
...and a 4800+ user Discord Chat Server! (click me)
I had a very similar experience with Curie... first week in I got blessed with a megaboost and gained all the faith in Steemit that I needed. As it happens we might think of Curie as a simple curating group, but it also serves the valuable function of motivating new comers to stay on board and put in the work to this platform. I do not know the stats, but it would be a in interesting poll to know how many people were unsure of Steemit and then @curie made them believers.
I'm sure that number is in the thousands...
I have no idea how to collect this data, but it's possible one could figure out a way to poll the blockchain and compare account activity of Curie'd voters months later vs a control group who wasn't.
Of course, the conclusions would be colored by the fact the better authors more likely to get Curie'd would also be more likely to have stuck around anyway.
Could make an interesting post for someone without a 286 long log of un-/partially written posts.
wow 286?
Yes, if some one undertakes any such survey, it should be very neutral. I mean and I feel that there could be few hundred people who might have chosen to stay back on Steem because of curie's curation but then there could be several times more who perhaps got frustrated for not getting curie'd and were either got demotivated enough to quit this platform or are still slogging on, holding some grudges for meeting an unfair treatment. So the question remains, how much fair is the system of getting curie'd to all. Mostly, it's just a small handful of Steemers whose posts are considered by curie. But what of those whose posts despite being of probably better or equitable quality but never caught the eyes of any curie? That should also be accounted for in the survey.
If it wasn't for curie many promising bloggers noobs would have quit the platform. I am sure there is some abuse of the project, but still one of the best if not the best here on steemit. A big thank you to the guys behind it :D
It's got to be very hard to abuse Curie. Your standing as a curator for submitting to Curie goes down if you submit bad articles, so it is strongly dis-incentivized, and any article has to go through multiple layers of curation.
Well I won't discuss this here more for obvious reasons ;)
Great post @lexiconical, is there any reason why @curie is powering down?
I was lucky to get curie's vote once :)
It's likely simply business as usual for Curie. Curie pays out a lot of rewards to curators (and possibly more who assist behind the scenes, I couldn't say) and therefore needs a steady stream of liquid Steem for that reason.
I've included this data for every witness by popular demand, but I wouldn't read into it too much.
Thank you for your question.
good
Please don't cut and paste low-effort comments. I'll be forced to start flagging these soon to hide them.
As you know I was touched but Curie last week, my rep is now 51 , does that mean im over the hill now in terms of Curie votes.
Very close to it. I think you might be right at the cut-off, actually (I forget). Better put out a good one before you hit 52!
The only drawback of this project to my mind is that one cannot submit his/her own post.
If someone writes a good posts and doesn't get noticed by the users who submit these posts to @curie, he may quit the platform @lexiconical
That's an issue, but probably necessary due to human nature. I'd say less than 10% of us are objective enough to accurately submit their own posts for curation. It takes a lot of intellectual work to try and become unbiased, that's one reason Judge/Magistrate isn't a minimum wage job.
You are right.
But then, there should be at least one chance per user to submit their own posts, if his post doesn't qualify , he shouldn't be allowed further submissions of his own posts.
That is what I think. At the same time curie is more than a year old, they might have laid down these rules in the best interest of steemit
Your proposal sounds reasonable, but it's probably a low priority to change because there is likely not that much value to be gained by people submitting their own posts overall.
u prob are
Thank you for your detailed article you explained so well.l tried to listen to YouTube videos but this is the best explanation of curie ever
Thank you, that is a very kind compliment.
This is really a great post,
I admire being a curator,
I have being working on some of my article. When completed i will realease
I look forward to it.
Realy great
good
It is important to vote for witness. More important - to choose the right ones. It is our choice but your posts helped me a lot to understand better who the witnesses are.
I'm glad I could help out in this regard! It's simply too much effort for us all to research it ourselves...
Thank for sharing @lexiconical
just very good pic
You are welcome.