My main argument is that some Hivers get rewards regardless of the content they post, where others Hivers that put a lot of effort in their posts, but hardly get any rewards at all
I am not if this is true or not, not sure how to meassure it. But just that people think and feel this is very offsetting and bad for us if we ever want to reach more people.
I dont have any solutions to share, I just know that we might loose people no matter what. Downvoting can lead to people feeling discourage and leave and not doing anything can discourage people who have been here a while but not feeling acknowledge.
I think its excellent anyways that short-form is a thing now. Opens up new ways of finding new people and for some people its much easier to do short form rather than blogging.
Upvotes within 1 minute of posting a 7 minute read blog like this one is a clear sign.
There will always be people who don't like the change and those who do. And is it really bad to loose a couple of people that are unhappy? If we get new, enthusiastic people in their place. I do think the user retention would improve when we have a better distribution of rewards.
Yeah thats pretty good sign. Could auto-voting represent that people dont wanna upvote a particular post, instead they wanna upvote the users as a whole?
Just trying to speculate here. I dont use auto-voting for my own account and dont look at maximizing my curation apr.
I think so to. And probably would Blurt be a bigger success if downvoting was the big issue.
I think it's often a matter of maximizing curation rewards. Or upvoting posts from friends I think.
Probably. Could one solution be that you can choose then if you wanna vote on posts, but dont have auto voting, or have a other type of vote where you say I wany user x to have my vote. Not sure how that vote value would be calculated or so. But maybe you choose that like once a week or something instead and if you dont check in these votes decay?
Not sure if I make myself clear or not 🧐