My version of Steem is NOT content based, It is Contribution based.
Providing content to Steem that attracts viewership and new users to sign-up does count as contributions but it is definitely not the only type and might not be the one Steem needs the most of right now.
When you get rewarded by the Steem blockchain for your contribution the amount earned should not be in any ways related to the intrinsic value of the content produced but on the added benefit to Steem itself as judged by every Steem-Power holders.
If for example Steem needs about 100 good post every day to keep the current viewership and attract more users, the 10 000 other posts of lesser value are not needed and should earn almost nothing.
With SBD now at about 10$, I believe too much of the inflation is being wasted on undeserving "content producers" to keep the illusion of fairness and that the platform is all about content - it's not!
Utopian.io is a good application of that contribution based model. The content itself isn't what's being rewarded, the content submitted by Utopians onto Steem blockchain is merely a proof-of-contribution, in this case Open-source contribution.
If you're a posting content to Steem, take some time once in a while to reflect and show us how your contribution is helping Steem grow.
- How many people have read your content?
- How many were new users visiting from outside of Steemit?
- What efforts have you done to promote your content outside of Steemit?
- How many people have created accounts to engage in the comment section?
- What kind of contribution the people you've on-boarded likely to make?
- How effective is your content at helping people understand how Steem work?
- How many investors did it convince to invest in Steem?
- What problem does your contribution solve?
- How would producing such content not be possible without the reward earned?
- How does your content benefit from being on a censorship resistant immutable blockchain?
- ... other suggestion ? (Please comments below)
You are very correct on this post. I joined this platform barely two weeks ago and reading through many posts, I found out that most are reward conscious thereby killing the creativity freedom and originality expression. I for one joined this platform for the sake of creativity, inspiration and exposure...And all those come from originality and freedom of expression, that is expressing one's thoughts and inspirations the original way they came free from the thoughts of how much rewards they can fetch you. This way, you would be surprise how much impact you would have on someone reading or viewing your post because he/she would be seeing your innerman (inspirator) in it. Honestly, am really glad reading this post and comments from others who ve read it too, it tells me that am not alone in my thoughts..Let's keep Steemit alive and flourishing by nurturing it with original and self expression posts and comments free from rewards consciousness or focus..long live Steemit!
Great comment, BTW Steemit is a company, Steem is generally what you'd want to wish long life to.
Explanation for high upvote : https://steemit.com/steem/@transisto/temporarily-pausing-my-anti-abuse-efforts-while-sbd-is-off-the-chart
oh! Alright, copy that...so sorry it's coming late, Just noticed your reply on my comment now, you know am still learning . I humbly appreciate your correction, thank you.
#long live steem# Smiles..
my last post contains a free gift Happy New year everyone!
Many of the things people have talked about are needed, but one that has not been mentioned is long term members being demanding and rude simply because they have a different idea of what a tag is for.
I can understand some tags may have been made for a specific reason, but how is a new person to know of that reason.
A case in point, the tag nature. I write many posts about foraging for wild food. Of course one of the main places you do this in "In Nature". But I have been chastised by a couple of people who do not agree that the nature tag is a good place for foraging posts.
So many things are subjective. It's the old, "One man's trash is another man's treasure." It's hard to pin people down into narrowly defined sections. But it is danged near impossible when no one can agree on what those sections are for.
If foraging and nature dont go together then im not sure whats happening to this world..... i pretty much forage everywhere i go whether its my own fridge, my mother in laws fridge or nature. There is no other better word in the English dictionary to describe the hunt for food. I wish you all the best on your continued foraging quest.
Thank you for your well wishes. I think in their mind, nature is a category more for a nature centered variety of a travel log. But nature will never allow herself to be stuffed into such a tiny box.
I also think that people who have been here longer can either be extremely helpful or extremely pretentious and start policing everything. Everyone should just meditate and chill the hell out lol
There are several big name, high rollers engaged in public flame wars and doxing. They definitely need to chill the hell out.
Yes!!!
this can be solved with a peer to peer moderation system that would make tags more like subreddits. so then things can be re-categorized as needed. But that would require a community effort to figure out a fair moderation method.
I’ve been wondering the same thing myself. I’ve been posting photos from my travels but they seem to have very little value/payout so perhaps commenting and helping to create a discussion based community is a better use of my time.
Same here. It's kind of tough because posting your own content feels like it's what the platform was built to do. Not "blogging" or "posting" feels like not participating. Curating and commenting definitely adds value, but your curation efforts as a minnow are almost useless, and comments certainly add something on "real" posts. But bid bots have created an atmosphere that fills the front pages with posts that people don't care about interaction with. They're just targets for bid bots. I'm guilty of the same thing. I'd like to have some influence here, and the fastest way to get there is to engage in a way that may not be best for the platform, but it almost feels like an ambiguous ends justify the means. The world can't be full of bloggers, there has to be someone to blog to, but Steemit doesn't offer much to the "viewer" so to speak...
Minnows curation needs to be much more highly valued to attract readers and engagement.
Nailed it with that one @surfyogi! If new user upvotes had some impact it would encourage people to stick around and create better content AND connect with the people with whom they find interesting. As it stands 30 upvotes from newer accounts still equal nothing, almost. I think this is a source of discouragement hundreds of people who would be great community additions if they could see past the zero they are "worth" when they get active and try to engage.
I think you nailed it @lorilikes... minnow newcomers see total garbage posts reaping huge rewards, they deplete their Steem power with just trying to vote on even a relatively few items per day, they come after seeing videos over on YouTube saying “come to Steemit and you can vote yourself money” which after they do so, it doesn’t take long to run into the current of some earlier adopters who discuss how they are resentful of people who comment without an upvote and consider it “spamming for upvotes” which leaves a minnow type wondering if they have any proper access to the conversation without running their Steem power out to nothing very quickly just so they can attempt to engage... its comes across as a lot of mixed messages sometimes. Are you supposed to participate or not... what’s the “right way” to do so... it can be difficult to know what your “value” is in these mixed messages.
Like @netuosos said, it's about striking that balance between posting and commenting, but your comments need to also be thoughtful. Low-quality spam comments get no love. What I've also found is that sometimes my comments will generate higher votes than posts I've written. But there are a lot of times where comments of mine won't get anything. And that's a good barometer too. It tells me either a) that my comment wasn't good enough to warrant any votes from the community, and/or b) maybe the author of the post I commented under isn't particularly receptive to me and I should focus my energy on other authors.
When you comment - users may watch your profile. Empty profile - boring user.
While I’m sure your pics are beautiful, I’m about as interested in your vacation pics as the next persons food pics. There needs to be more value added somehow.
Honestly, I just couldn't will myself past the following:
It seems so ridiculously absolute. I strongly disagree.
If you take away copyrights law how do you monetize content? Content data stored on a decentralized blockchain carries a cost to everyone holding Steem.
So if I were to think in absolute I'd say content on it's own has a negative value.
Explanation for high upvote : https://steemit.com/steem/@transisto/temporarily-pausing-my-anti-abuse-efforts-while-sbd-is-off-the-chart
Care to explain your downvote?
Since my comment has got some significant upvotes, I figure I should flesh that out a bit. First and foremost (IMO) steem is a social media concept. The thing that fascinated me most about the place/blockchain when I first heard about it was the alternative paradigm. That is, instead of the usuals like Facebook/Medium/etc where YOU create content but THEY generate income from it, here you get rewarded for the content you create. First and foremost, I think that is and rightly should be the single most important identifying feature of the steem blockchain (via the various front ends). And in that regard, I think it is entirely appropriate that rewards at least in some ways reflect the quality of the content.
The other part of the platform here is the blockchain itself and the crypto aspects of it. I think these are valid points of distinction that deserve focus and warrant the attention of at least some part of the community to help prosper. But to hold that every person on the platform must put the specific interests of the blockchain itself first before any consideration to their own rewards, is too rigid a view IMO. And this idea that I've seen taking hold in comments around the place lately that there's something inherently bad about a member only focusing on a very narrow selection of other users, is kind of authoritarian in my opinion. I'm not an anarcho-capitalist, so I don't expect that we should necessarily be free to award an unlimited increasing amount of rewards to any one individual. But I don't see it as inherently bad, as some comments are getting close to expounding. I think it can be problematic in some circumstances, and that the first recourse to dealing with it should be a community awareness campaign to attempt to more fairly spread some of the wealth if warranted.
That's an interesting take.
Maybe it isn't quality. I've noticed that content range from insightful to BS but the ones that receive the most interactions are what's presented nicely.
I, for example, haven't been the best at presenting whatever I've written. This has made me slowly learn basic coding for formatting (Maybe it's less than basic) and making the content presentable.
Very superficial but humans have developed a need for beauty. Feed it.
No, quality is just as subjective as value. Yes, you can create external metrics for it, but someone created those metrics based on a system of values. Steem(it) is a social network. You get rewarded for the content you create if the community finds value in it. Steemit isn't like a job where you get paid for work. It's an entirely different system. The trick, like any creative endeavor, is to build up a community around your work that values similar things as you do.
Also, Medium pays writers who are part of it's Partner Program, which I am a part of. The problem with that model, in my view, is that the content that pays is behind a metered paywall, and they're not very transparent about how payouts work (at least when I first experimented with it). That's why I like Steem - the blockchain allows you to see what's going on under the hood, so to speak.
Quality being subjective doesn't change what I said in any way. Your argument could be used against @transistos approach of rewarding the subjective "what's best for the platform".
Maybe I misread your original post, which is what informed my reading of your follow-up, but it seems as if you think that posts should be rewarded based on their intrinsic value, as if the quality of a post can be measured objectively. But that doesn't make sense because quality is subjective, especially on the Internet. Posts don't really have a measurable intrinsic value; market value, on the other hand, is signaled by price. If you write something you feel is worth $1,000 USD because of the time and energy you put into it, but the community only rewards it with $50 USD worth of votes, then $50 USD is its market value on Steemit because that's what the community (including you) said it was worth. In that sense, the community decides what is best for itself, which is how the upvote system works. Intrinsic value =/= market value. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/011215/what-difference-between-intrinsic-value-and-current-market-value.asp By putting it on Steemit, you are basically submitting your work to a 'pay what you want' model where upvotes are weighted 'likes.' The fact that you think you didn't get rewarded for what you believe was the post's intrinsic value is on you. You could have sold it to a news site for a fixed price, or turned it into a Kindle book and sold it for x amount of dollars.
Transisto is saying that people should be voting on what's best for the broader platform as opposed to what individual posts you get value from reading. I disagree. Value or quality being subjective doesn't change the fact that transisto's statement is terribly absolute.
Okay, now I get where you're coming from. Your disagreement makes way more sense. Looks like we're on the same side in so far as we're opposing absolutism.
Absolutely agree!
Downvote from @transisto. Doesn't like someone disagreeing with him. Pretty much sums up the ethic of his side of the argument over the last few weeks.
Isn’t a downvote a legitimate expression of their disagreement? Nobody is obligated to elaborate on their opinion.
It's generally held that a downvote is best used as as flagging feature for offensive comments, spam, and wildly inaccurate information. Of course, one can pick their own reasons for flagging, but without any explanation from him I'm free to speculate why he's doing it, particularly based on his past behaviour.
Thanks for that, exactly my thinking...
the problem remains the same.Moneymoneymoney .. Thank you very much @transisto for sharing this information.
The question is also how to monitor roof closely because motivation goes down in many people. they start with good ideas but get discouraged quickly seeing the potential gains and thinking that they will never get there. Some people like me also arrive new and do not know the rules so can make some mistakes. it is to be hoped that these fall on posts like yours. so thanks again,let's work on it and good luck.
Take care
P&U
More users. :) and advertisements from big companies.. $$$
It needs a balanced system.. sorry but some posts are brilliant and get no love. Its hard to keep up. I like the fact that content creators can be paid in Steemit.
I like this post it answers a lot of questions that I am sure alot of us have as a new user of the platform it's nice to see a new way of meeting new people.
I personally use the platform to upload some of our reviews and promote our site users content and other content i find to add to the posts that are relevent but i also believe times are changing and its time for a new way of posting online . At the end of the day should people expect accomplished writers and video creators( Dtube)
I rate your post very seriously. I can understand some of the serious questions you are asked about with the Steem community. I also contribute to the growth of steam but my way is different because it invites and advise people closest like friends, family and people around me. at this time I still have not dared to invite other people because the post is still around 0.4 has not reached 1 sbd. personally I really love this platform. I am new here and now always follow the development of this community and maybe later on I will also create programs that support the growth of steam. and I also want a payment out there valid steem (can be paid with steam). and now I again think about how to bring steem as a means of payment in transactions in the real world.
quality content is not only posts by bloggers with 1000 plus words -- art and music are very poorly supported on steemit and represent real quality and diversity for an audience to read and view. I think the people earning over $100 should have their rewards scaled down to share with the pool a greater amount for more users.