You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Elimination of Curation Rewards

in #curation8 years ago

Every word there also applies to author rewards. Should we eliminate those too? IMO, Paying someone for their labor means that they should be paid in proportion to the work they do or the value that they add.

Probably the huge difference is that paying for content drives the quality of content up, as outlined in the photography example in the post. Paying for voting does not drive up the quality of voting, as described in the post.

Personally, I am an advocate of letting authors set their own curation percentage and use that as another lever in the competition for up-votes. New authors could set their curation percentage high to attract voters.

It's not a bad idea, and one that was brought up during the HF discussion. It would be interesting to see something like this played out, although it would add a lot of complexity to the system. And just stating the obviously (not that it is a horrible thing) but it would essentially be a form of vote buying / bribery.

Sort:  

Paying for voting does not drive up the quality of voting, as described in the post.

I'm not totally convinced of that. streemian, steemvoter, and autosteem have enabled hundreds of thousands or millions of votes that would not have been cast otherwise. That probably wouldn't have happened without the incentive that curation rewards provide, and we have no idea what the platform would have been like without them. Also, we have yet to see how things play out in the long term. Many people are still unfamiliar with the rewards rules.

I have thought that it would be interesting to see what happens if bots and guilds all shut down voluntarily at the same time for a couple of days. My guess is that a small number of authors would like it a lot and most would not. I doubt if we'd be able to coordinate that experiment, though.

And just stating the obviously (not that it is a horrible thing) but it would essentially be a form of vote buying / bribery.

Maybe. Or maybe it's just an inducement to evaluate a post that a curator might have otherwise ignored. I doubt if many people would intentionally vote on poor quality posts just for a tiny curation reward, especially knowing that it's likely to be a wasted vote because other voters won't do the same. Either way, as long as it's transparent, I don't see it as a problem. The complexity would be my bigger concern, and may well be a "show stopper."

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.25
TRX 0.20
JST 0.037
BTC 95682.64
ETH 3545.07
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.78