You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: What Is 1UP - And How Can It Improve The Voting System?
I really like the idea of the randomized time on voting within the trail, that way over time the odds of coming before or after the bigger voters within the trail isn't too bad and normalized the longer someone stays with the trail, and it prevents a race to the bottom happening among members of the trail as we see with others who follow popular authors etc.
Interesting thought. This would probably make it fair in the long run and takes away the early follower bonus. There could still a few spots reserved for the early 1UP curators to incentivize using the 1UP button.
Do you have any suggestions how to make people want to use the 1UP button more often?
Honestly, people are pretty much driven mostly by $$$, or the chance to make more future $$$, or cash in some current direct $$$ rewards, or a delegation that would get them more $$$, or a chance to get voted on by some delegated entity which translates into $$$ and some visibility for more $$$ potential, etc. etc. etc. so the answer to your question probably has something to do with $$$. Like, am I responding to your posts or comments in the hopes that I get some $$$? Maybe. Do I want this platform to succeed? That would probably make me a little more $$$, or at least get those I vote on some more $$$.
Sadly as with most instances of things people are attracted to, huge sums of $$$, or at least the ability to control the flow of $$$, are very attractive, so your end goal is probably going to be the same as the other platforms on the site i.e. turn 1up into a giant reward pool vacuum and have your two boost-1up and vote-2you bots be huge and vote on both the curated and the curators. At least that's how all the other large curation platforms work, and by that I mean nearly all of the groups on the site. At least with your method there might not have to be so much "overhead" and its rewards won't be so confined to a small group of administrators who get to dictate their own pay.
Great idea. It could be like the Utopian moderator payment system where auto-comments once per week for each mod and tgen upvoted according to their points.
We do need to do something to address the reward pool abuse on steemit. I know you're talking about utopian. But steemit is where people land first and if they are seeing rubbish content rewarded, they will just copy that process.
The danger is steemit turns into a big spam fest.
You need to care also about how well it goes down with people on the outside when they see these mass flagging drama campaigns and have no idea what is going on, or really what exactly the problem is, or the rules. That's far more likely to leave a bad impression and put then off
If the goal is you're concerned about leaving a good impression with people, then you will understand that you don't want your attempt at a cure to make things worse.
People don't want to find that they leave YouTube for the supposedly censorship free Steemit and then find just a single user with a powerful enough vote has the power to screw them over in many ways more than YouTube.
I agree that the cure should not cause more damage. But the first sensible step is to all agree that there is a problem.
If these solutions help make steemit more accessible and rewarding for new community members, I am for it. Even if it highlights problems in the short term.
One thing we can learn from Facebook is that the value of the social network comes from users. The more users who come over to steemit, the more value STEEM has, it's a win win for everyone
Actually, more users does not necessarily always mean more value for STEEM, in fact it's quite possible for users who never buy in to steem to reduce the value of steem by using up network resources, driving the costs of hosting servers up, and making the place less attractive for potential witnesses and investors.
I agree to a degree. If we attract lots of short term money chasers, then yes.
But I am seeing new users sharing genuine stories about their lives. That gives me hope.
If steemit even gets to 1/100 value of Facebook, the server costs will be immaterial. That would be a 5x multiple growth. All within the realms reality in my opinion
I would love to see this topic move to where I see is a more productive area, but I have a tendency to end up with quite long posts opening posts so i understand if someone feels too exhausted at the idea of reading it all. At least initially, i find it saves time if not having 10 back and forth replies just filling in the gaps I left out..
I totally agree with you that the first step is recognise there's a problem but the next step makes the first step meaningful and without this part it can go from being something useful to harmful.
If you take away haejin's self voting and most of the significant complaints will stay standing because everyone is caught up in this idea that haejin represents "the problem" and since the problem is also that poor quality content gets heavily rewarded and haejin's case involves something he DOES have control over, they get this idea that it's all caused by something people have have control over.
This idea that he is "abusing" steemit so that without this exploit that would solve the problem. You know they see it this way because otherwise there's no way to see flagging as being effective to punish those who "abuse the reward pool" until they stop. They don't seem to realise that what they really don't like, the idea that post rewards don't fit quality, is a problem, not caused by people you can get angry at it's something that is a fundamental flaw in Steemit and that all this aggressive flagging and trolling campaigns are just damaging Steemit with no hope of success.
I am new here, so maybe I've not seen it the same way as you have.
I think there is no centralised person in control of steemit. It is a decentralised social network. So it is up to the community to decide who should get rewarded and if enough people feel that the likes of haejin are "abusing" the platform, then that is a valid view.
Second, I am much more positive about steemit than a few others. I remember the early days of Facebook and other social media platforms. They had the same problems in that low quality advertising made their site look cheap. We basically have the same problem, but with a blockchain twist. I genuinely believe that as more people come into steemit, it will be easier for the community to self regulate.
Optimally the 1up would be implemented on all steem front-ends by default, utopian is a bit more predictable so they launched there first to front-run the utopian vote, there is no general steemit bot and a lot of the other apps with delegations are a bit more "random" as it were in what they vote on.
Steemit being a spam fest wouldn't be an issue if people were actually making and viewing content that they liked, but since everyone is just here because they are either invested or need to make money, the topics discussed are always the same and things are a bit stale in the first place.
At least if the 1up vote works as intended when applied to different areas there's a good chance a dedicated group of 1up voters will feel their vote matters more than if they didn't have access to the 1up option.
In that case, let me tell you my story.
I was an active user on twitter @kabir_LDN and @FBPE_central
I came across STEEM from trying to figure out what all the coins in the top 50 do.
I love the concept and I have already got about 5 people to join. So I see STEEM changing into a genuine social network sooner rather than later
I think the main danger we have is another team coming along and they push their own coin with their own fine-tuned, user-friendly social media website with a smaller dev cut, better initial distribution and a focus on the end-user. If they focus on actually generating social media interest, user retention rates and have a solid growth plan then we're looking at some dire times ahead. I envision more than a few existing and potential companies trying to go that route, which is why we need to at least TRY to make the lowly new user feel a little more involved in the process with things like 1up.
Totally agree. We need to make things better.
It's in everyone's interest to make STEEM a success. It's a shame a few people cannot see past their short term gains.
I've been trying to find genuine new users and give them upvotes to encourage them.