You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: For PH community members only: few words about our curation trail

in #steem5 months ago

Hello, dear Piotr.

There are no strict "rules" ...

Perhaps you should study the possibility of establishing defined parameters in this regard and that the allocation of upvotes does not feel like a subjective decision.

Several users have understood that just by setting 20% ​​for @ph-fund as a beneficiary, they acquire the right to receive a strong upvote. So it would probably be beneficial to create a scale of upvotes where factors such as engagement, feedback, comment activity, and un-powerdown define the weight of the upvotes.

This is just my humble opinion about it. I do it, thinking of offering a transparent rewards scheme (I don't mean that until now it's not).

STRICT NO POWER DOWN policy.

This policy concerns me directly. I just suspended my powerdown on steemit.
From now on, I will commit to growing my SP. I will manage my resources to maintain my economy with the rewards for publishing and the support that I receive directly from You.

I hope that many others will join this "No Powerdown" initiative.

After all - I want to ensure, that our community will build some "Dolphins" and "ORCAS".

Thank you for caring about us and giving us the best advice so that we can grow and improve the economy of our community and of the Steem Blockchain in general.

Sort:  

Several users have understood that just by setting 20% ​​for @ph-fund as a beneficiary, they acquire the right to receive a strong upvote. So it would probably be beneficial to create a scale of upvotes where factors such as engagement, feedback, comment activity, and un-powerdown define the weight of the upvotes.

I agree with you on this point. I think that for all users it would be useful to know what kind of upvote they can expect.

Thanks for your comment @juanmolina and for sharing your thoughts with me.

Perhaps you should study the possibility of establishing defined parameters in this regard and that the allocation of upvotes does not feel like a subjective decision.

Unfortunatelly, I disagree. It would change mindset into direction which I'm afraid I wouldn't like. This is how factories or corporations can function, where people have very little flexibility and they simply need to do what they are being told to do.

This is just my humble opinion about it. I do it, thinking of offering a transparent rewards scheme (I don't mean that until now it's not).

One thing Steemit and hive touch me, that if you offer transparent rewards scheme then people will simply ... abuse it. By knowing exact rules, most users will focus on fullfilling those requirements which will allow them to maximize their rewards while putting absolute minimum effort.

I've already tried once small experiment with group of several users from our community: I established weekly "minimum" amount of comments they need to post within PH community. And after few weeks I've realized, that most of those users STICKED to minimum. Even those who were more engaging - they reduced engagement. To meet minimum expectations.
Not to mention, that most comments started being very short. Sometimes like 1 line only.


This solution would be also "creativity killer". I'm trying to reward different ways of bringing value into our community. To inspire our members to come up with some ideas and solutions. If I would establish defined parameters - then I expect that meeting those parameters would be everyones major goal.

I need to slowly build members awareness and "fish out" those who I consider the most valuable, engaging etc. And focus my support on those users. Instead of supporting those whos main goal would be to "maximize rewards".

Not to mention, that it would make our community look very "strict" instead of being inspiring. I really do not see it working.

I hope that many others will join this "No Powerdown" initiative.

Either way, the most important point is to underline that "no power down policy" is something I want to promote and that it will be "mandatory" requirement for all those, who would like to receive additional support from our curation trail.

Yours, Piotr

I can understand your point of view very well. I think you have the best overview of the whole project and you can define how the upvotes are spread most wisely for the long term development of project.hope.

There is a big part of juggeling different factors that can be quite tricky I believe. I have to say that you are doing an amazing job and project.hope wouldn't be were it is without this ability of yours.

Best regards,
Achim

Just cruising back and I am VERY interested in the discussion.

All of these arguments and thoughts are quite well-thoughts. I do not have the answer as there is:

  • on the PH members' side maybe sometimes a feeling that they do not understand why they should not deserve the max/big upvote from the trail
  • on the PH Senior members/ @crypto.piotr side, there should be some flexibility to keep the most engaging members and avoid being played out by "maximizing rewards" members.

The start of No power down policy could be great as a common rule, but in the end the curation will remain curation and therefore might not be happening every time. Otherwise we would use a bot 😃