@ricardoguthrie, @samether, @williambanks, Do you see Steemit thriving if it becomes mostly arbitrage? I am actually asking. I admit I think it won't. I really don't understand things at this level. It does seem like such a shame that so many people would donate their time trying to grow real community only to have it ruined by brilliant moves. I think I'd be okay with @msgivings getting away with it if I didn't assume that it undermines what so many great people are donating their time to build here. One of my favorite Steemarians may have left already and it breaks my heart. Please tell me Steemit will be around next year if the number of @msgivings increases?
Thanks for your amazing response @williambanks. I didn't mean to imply that you were endorsing @msgivings. I certainly have experienced first-hand the impulse to upvote a person regardless of content and I imagine that it is what will win in the end regardless of anyone's intentions. I don't mind the popularity contest or even it being outsmarted. I know that you devote a lot of personal time to making Steemit a great experience for a lot of people. I'm doing that increasingly, too, and at the expense of my home's cleanliness. What I'm hoping to know..and maybe you said it but I didn't understand...is whether Steemit would be able to support a much higher number of users doing what @msgivings succeeded at. If so, I'm all for it.
Thanks again for your response. You're definitely one of the people making Steemit a wonderland of curiosities. :)
I'm not endorsing what @msgivings did. I'm explaining she was never a bot.
The move was a stroke of genius and I will always admire anyone who can make the rules of the system work in their favor though.
I think steemit will fail if we value the content more than the creator.
We seem to be trying to build our "feelings" around the content instead of the person who made that content.
When we try to build friendships with people, then we upvote their content regardless of quality, because we want them to succeed. When we curate, we try to find content that we think will trend and that usually means a handful of people and again quality doesn't really factor into this. So curation is now pretty much a bot task.
My answer, all things considered, would be to tie earnings to a combination of rep, followers and time on the platform. New accounts should max out at a tiny fraction of the total pool that day, while older more established accounts that have had time to mature and grow would gain a larger slice of the pie. I think that if we're going to have a fixed daily distribution then it's looking more and more like an earnings cap might be a good thing too. Maybe not a daily one, but a weekly one probably wouldn't hurt. Otherwise uncap the fixed distribution amount so people can feel like they have some value for their individual contributions.
I dunno if that's the right answer, but I fail to see why an introduceyourself post should earn one dime more than @gonzo 's epics for instance.
Steemit is a popularity contest though, like all social media.
@ricardoguthrie, @samether, @williambanks, Do you see Steemit thriving if it becomes mostly arbitrage? I am actually asking. I admit I think it won't. I really don't understand things at this level. It does seem like such a shame that so many people would donate their time trying to grow real community only to have it ruined by brilliant moves. I think I'd be okay with @msgivings getting away with it if I didn't assume that it undermines what so many great people are donating their time to build here. One of my favorite Steemarians may have left already and it breaks my heart. Please tell me Steemit will be around next year if the number of @msgivings increases?
Thanks for your amazing response @williambanks. I didn't mean to imply that you were endorsing @msgivings. I certainly have experienced first-hand the impulse to upvote a person regardless of content and I imagine that it is what will win in the end regardless of anyone's intentions. I don't mind the popularity contest or even it being outsmarted. I know that you devote a lot of personal time to making Steemit a great experience for a lot of people. I'm doing that increasingly, too, and at the expense of my home's cleanliness. What I'm hoping to know..and maybe you said it but I didn't understand...is whether Steemit would be able to support a much higher number of users doing what @msgivings succeeded at. If so, I'm all for it.
Thanks again for your response. You're definitely one of the people making Steemit a wonderland of curiosities. :)
I'm not endorsing what @msgivings did. I'm explaining she was never a bot.
The move was a stroke of genius and I will always admire anyone who can make the rules of the system work in their favor though.
I think steemit will fail if we value the content more than the creator.
We seem to be trying to build our "feelings" around the content instead of the person who made that content.
When we try to build friendships with people, then we upvote their content regardless of quality, because we want them to succeed. When we curate, we try to find content that we think will trend and that usually means a handful of people and again quality doesn't really factor into this. So curation is now pretty much a bot task.
My answer, all things considered, would be to tie earnings to a combination of rep, followers and time on the platform. New accounts should max out at a tiny fraction of the total pool that day, while older more established accounts that have had time to mature and grow would gain a larger slice of the pie. I think that if we're going to have a fixed daily distribution then it's looking more and more like an earnings cap might be a good thing too. Maybe not a daily one, but a weekly one probably wouldn't hurt. Otherwise uncap the fixed distribution amount so people can feel like they have some value for their individual contributions.
I dunno if that's the right answer, but I fail to see why an introduceyourself post should earn one dime more than @gonzo 's epics for instance.
Steemit is a popularity contest though, like all social media.