I just received a thoughtful comment from @akintunde on my post here in which I attempt to outline reasons why we need to come together as a society to promote positive values. His comment inspired me to go into a little bit of detail about why I think the current voting system (binary up or down) are broken in a lot of ways.
I think the feedback is worthy of its own post and would love to hear your thoughts, so here is my response to his comment:
Well, I understand what you are saying. You are talking about the extremes of evil, the moral measure of it and all but the truth remains that there is no absolute extreme in life . We are all just in between and that is all it will ever be.
This is certainly true and I do not deny it one bit!
Nevertheless, we can only try to shift towards the best , I mean that part that best that leans towards UTOPIA . Steem is a place that tries to lean towards that but, to be sincere, STEEM is not perfect either.
That is the premise of my idea here: https://steemit.com/life/@halfjew22/proposal-for-extracting-value-from-positive-behaviors-and-its-imagined-societal-impact
We can't absolutely define a perfect place, but we can attempt to always improve. That's the basis of my idea in the post there. I would love to hear your feedback on it.
There are wars going on here too. it's just that it's a war of votes being thrown at each other in a UP or DOWN direction.
The whales believe they own this place and they want all of use to think that same way which is a really good idea becuase if you don't exhibit a sense of ownershuip, your contribution will lack the right motivation or inspiration. That is a "utopian" philosophy.
This is one of my key frustrations with the platform thus far. There are certain people that can post (relatively low effort / energy) posts that make a few hundred dollars, while you and I can spend a few hours writing a post and make less than a dollar. I think the premise is sound, however, we need a more multidimensional analysis of what makes a post have "quality." For example, I think accuracy and proof in what one claims is valuable. I think honest and respectful debate is quality. I think well typed, grammatically correct posts are valuable.
I do not think a ton of posts on what someone speculates about Bitcoin prices is quality, I don't think people posting about their meal prep is valuable (if that's all they post.) I don't think watching people play video games is particularly valuable. However, there is undeniable value to some in those posts.
I think one way to solve the problem of these "vote wars" so to speak is to apply a multidimensional rating system to the content. An upvote simply can't contain enough feedback to represent accurate value. We should be able to upvote the mindless enjoyment of a post, or the honesty and respectfulness of a debate between two people or the kindness and thoughtfulness one puts into a comment and the higher their rating in those respective categories, the higher their influence in that category. That's what I'm trying to get at, and I can't think of a way in which that idea wouldn't work. I'm confident that the rating system, if created in that manner, would be able to be applied in all different aspects of life as well, and not just online on social media.
But then, some people think it is wrong to upvote yourself , so they retaliate by downvoting you. So , it's a war of freedom to vote. That is not utopian.
I personally don't feel as if post content that is not worth upvoting. So it follows that I will upvote almost all of my content. If someone feels that the content I am posting isn't valuable, they should absolutely have the right to downvote me and tell me why, but then it follows that I feel I should have the right to engage in discussion with that person about why they found my particular content lacking in value. That would truly promote more positive dialogues between people rather than just nonsense pandering for money - which I unfortunately see is a big "issue" currently with the platform. When the value of content does not directly correlate with its rewards, the system is not healthily functioning. Just looking at the front page, we see various people playing video games, someone talking about eating by themselves, and some large group ("centralized") posts.
I'm not complaining about centralized posts, but rather stating that this content becomes repetitive and stale if the content from individual creators doesn't rise to the top. It's a hard problem to solve and Steemit takes great steps in doing so, but there are definitely better solutions that can be created, and I think I'm on to one.
So in the real sense of it, there is no perfection anywhere, we can only try to create perfect systems but it will never happen. NEVER!!
Perfection simply cannot exist. I don't think there is any denying that. However, we establish useful metrics and compare improvements based of hypothesis and adjust should we be incorrect about those hypothesis.
Steemit is on to something, and I very much look forward to seeing how we can influence, improve, and innovate together.
You list some very good arguments. I definitely agree with you, I think for new Steemit users or even experienced non whale Steemit users, it is almost impossible for one of their articles to appear in the trending section. The whales have all the control over this part of the platform and enjoy all the effortless attention. The promoted content section is also a part of Steemit they control, they get the high rewards.
Whether this can even be solved or changed, I really have no idea... As I also stated in my article I feel Steemit is unconsciously supporting inequality and indeed very becoming more centralized everyday. I'm hoping this will improve with time but for now I don't see this changing.
Cheers!
I certainly think this can be solved. Whether or not it is on this platform is a completely different question. I'm not sure really how to even determine what Steemit "wants". It seems like such an unidentifiable identity? Is it @ned? Is it a collection of the whales? Who makes decisions? Can we vote?
These are actually all honest questions to which I have no idea the answer to.
I certainly think the ideas I've laid out would do nothing but good for the value created by the platform. Wouldn't you say?
Yes I agree but I'm afraid your ideas will never be seen by the right people and this way nothing changes... Your post will just disappear in all the mass articles that are getting posted everyday.
I think a lot of good ideas go to waste like this because there is nobody who we know who can implement these ideas in the platform. You have any idea if Steem developers are roaming their Steemit platform for suggestions of members? I'm not sure!
That's a very sad, but unfortunate reality. I think there is a saving grace in persistence though. If you aren't heard the first time you say something, if you feel it's worth being heard, you say it louder and you say it more until someone hears you.
And if that doesn't work, we live in such an amazing technological time that we can create our own platform that would work better!
I agree! Some posts are getting no traffic that deserve to be seen.
Your Post Has Been Featured on @Resteemable!
Feature any Steemit post using resteemit.com!
How It Works:
1. Take Any Steemit URL
2. Erase
https://3. Type
reGet Featured Instantly – Featured Posts are voted every 2.4hrs
Join the Curation Team Here | Vote Resteemable for Witness
I fully agree with you man ! I ll will follow you and not in the idea that you will so the same but because I feel an commitment to quality !
I am sorry for my english errors but I am a french speaker :).
Thank you for caring about the voting system. Quality is the key, education is the key. If steemit want to be different than what facebook will be when they will swich to the blockchain, THIS QUESTION MATTERS A LOT !
Steemit could be the plateform where the independants searchers and teachers, artists and leaders of a better society could federate a very usefull knowledge.
Thank you so much for following me and for that kind compliment! There is a lack of quality control all over the place and I think we can do much, much better.
What exactly about my thoughts do you think can be improved? I'm constantly striving to improve and would appreciate any suggestions.
I would love to see a platform where independent searchers and teachers, artists and leaders could collectively aggregate a wealth of knowledge. I've touched on something similar to that in this post on an etymology of different things here. That article needs to be updated and organized better, but I believe the general idea comes across. I'd love to hear your feedback on that as well!
I think a simple way to improve the quality would be to let the posts gain value without a lilit in time. Because smart content take time to read, time to be writen and most of all it is valuable more longer. This is the difference between fast news and deep journalism, between a comment and a book,..
There is to variables : quantity and quality. Industrial times pushes us toward quantity but it has been seen that to prooduce in quantity, with an ammount of ressources (here it is time) limited pushes producers who cares about rentability to care less about quality. The attractiveness linked to the money is a sad but effective way to convince more people to come see what steemit is. And it is also a perfect way to free people from the need of a job they don't like or don't exerce freely.
Steemit limits the way we upvote to enhance a choice. This is to create a value of the vote but also to force people to think of what they want to upvote. So it s a paradoxe to push people to post so often. Or it is because they want the plateform to grow. But if it is that it is a bad move cause it will destroy what makes steemit so great. Again it is only my opinion and I don't blame cats or babies or food lovers. The system should be different indeed.
I think we can take the fact that meme posts on Dmania are worth thousands of times more money than my criticism of the value structure of the platform is evidence enough that this, if the voting remains the same, is not the platform for me.
I think you nailed it on the head. A voting system that works for more intelligible content must, by necessity, be more complicated than an up or down and time.
I'm not so sure it's sad, necessarily. I think Steemit is a great way of creating value for those that would otherwise not be able to create that value with certain creative avenues. I think humans crave creativity and I think today's societies make a very small effort to provide livelihood for those pursuing creativity, but Blockchain technology is, and will continue to, change that.
Absolutely!! I love cats, babies, and food posts too! However, I believe they require an objectively smaller amount of effort to create then a well thought out post. Or at least, they show up in such a greater proportion on the front page of the website that it leads me to wonder why the disparity.
Check out my Dtube video on how I think we could improve the system, not only in the respect of voting, but in all respects. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Unfortunately, I don't think there'll ever be any agreed measure for site wide quality control. Some people seem opposed to the concept itself. I have seen individual communities, such as @steemstem, taking QC into their own hands, at least. Only thing I'm really interested in a platform is usability and finding like-minded individuals.
Your Post Has Been Featured on @Resteemable!
Feature any Steemit post using resteemit.com!
How It Works:
1. Take Any Steemit URL
2. Erase
https://3. Type
reGet Featured Instantly � Featured Posts are voted every 2.4hrs
Join the Curation Team Here | Vote Resteemable for Witness