You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Basic Income? (revised intro - excuse my lack of understanding at the time of writing this)
Ahh, So what you're saying then is regardless of if it's shit or not you'll upvote it simply because the rest of the herd is?
That seems sort of like a design flaw to me that people feel they have to upvote content they wouldn't normally simply because they perceive a reward for doing so.
Right. The more people vote the more money you make if you vote early but after 30 minutes, to the effect that your vote after 1h is not worth much.
So from a curation perspective you vote on anything that is promising to get votes at 30 min. Any popular author and anything that has received votes already.
I agree it is a horrible design flaw. But I don't think it is being addressed. I do it like a stupid game. It's like logging in your iPhone game and picking up some extra credit just for showing up every other hour.....
Thank you for explaining your process to me.
Eventually I'm going to make a proposal to the higher ups to see if we can somehow skirt this design flaw and shape the current voting system into something that doesn't favour popularity over actual content. :)
@klye look into curie and a few of the other curation guilds. That's been the community's solution. @ned votes with one of these guilds too.
The problem with this is that it favors bots over humans and that it does not reward quality