You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Big Pay out and some lessons learned about stimulating comments vs payoff. About Randowhale
I agree with adding comments to the payout algo. There are too many popular authors that are essentially guaranteed rewards, regardless of what they put up, due to the fact that they have a trail or two that autovotes them.
I also agree that having 1000 engaged followers would be the key to success on the platform. I have over 600 followers, yet there appears to only be 50 or so that can be bothered upvoting or commenting on my posts. Plenty of non following followers.
I have tried engaging minnow support's discord chatroom to meet more engageable members, but it appears to be time spent clowning around rather than discussing anything meaningful. At this point, I'm at a loss as how to find the engagement that both you and I seek.
I think that the algo, if you believe the white paper, should stimulate quality content and discussions.
A lot of comments is a more reliable signal that a valuable conversation is taking place. Obviously it needs also to be tweaked for # of unique commenters, sub comments etc. so that it is not easily gamed.
But posts with hundreds of upvotes and 3 comments? Is that really a trustworthy signal that it is worth your time?
My posts go one of two ways, decent payout - limited comments or limited payout - tons of comments. I have yet figured out why it happens that way, but I much prefer the engagement for it leads to growth of a healthy following.
The posts that had the most comments should've made the most money, not the one's that luckily ran into a trail full of upvotes. It's upside down right now. I'm sure the algo will be tweaked again and again till the devs get it right, but how much damage is being done to new subs right now?
Yes I agree it is not healthy, there should be a predictable ratio between the work you put in and the return it creates.
Everything that makes it look like a lottery is going to negatively affect engagement.
I feel that comments should be a better indicator of the quality of the post. Honestly, what excites the most people to Steemit is the concept of "free money." Of course, with financial motivation, who wouldn't want to maximize their payout with the least effort.
Find a popular post with no substance, upvote it, bam you get curation reward
Find an intellectual post where you have to actually have to think hard on a good comment, upvote it, and bam you get penalized with no reward at all.
Unless something is made to the algorithm, there will always be people looking to "game" the system to maximize their welfare, which is of course not much different from the centralized power we have in most government structure.
Some will benefit and others will cry foul.
The best way to play this game is to be in it for the long haul. Keep true to yourself and keep posting insightful articles to differentiate yourself from the crowd.
The posts that you create speaks a lot about your personality as well as the "brand" you intend to personify. Your true fans will stay. "Untrue" fans will unfollow you eventually.
I'm not sure how this will work out but I would say, give this a try for at least 5 months. If it doesn't work, you can always switch strategy and try some new. Eventually something will stick and that's when you should capitalize on your new found knowledge. :D
I hope I answered your questions. Btw, I've resteemed your post ;)
Awesome reply, already seems to be working ! I think indeed that long term quality will win out. If not on Steemit.com it will pay off in other ways.
For me writing on Steemit.com is a system not a goal. (need to write a post about that) It is a great concept from Scott Adams.
For me, even if the earnings don't materialize, (although I already made an infinite amount more than on say cough Face* Cough Boo Cough ) I will still win because I am refining ideas and getting valuable feedback. Those Ideas I can apply in my coaching, maybe online courses, ... there are ever more ways to monetize ideas.
Check out Scott Adams on goals vs Systems, it's really worthwhile
Exactly. We can think about Steemit as an investment. I don't think Warren Buffet made his billions by being a short term trader. Obviously, think about writing on Steemit as "buying the Steemit" stocks.
There's so many strategies and tactics before you run out of ideas. You can do contests, give out free SBDs, videos, and etc but I believe at the end of the day, people don't need to feel warm and fuzzy inside.
It's just plain O good content.
Then again, I might just be wrong since the world doesn't work the way I perceive it. If I'm wrong, let's just call it learning. :D
Yeah i have almost 400 followers after several months and i average 15 to 20 votes and only about 5 people actively engage through comments. Is it a strategy or politics? Id say its both.
I think it's a lot of factors all at the same time. One of the failings of #hardfork19 was the increase in minnow voting power without giving them the sliding scale for % of vote. This cut the number of upvotes down by a % that I'm not sure of, I felt a large change after the fork.
By voting less, I think it disengaged the population greatly. If you are out of votes, you will likely stop reading and commenting, for you don't plan on upvoting any more posts that day. People's strategies were changed by the HF in a decidedly negative fashion.
Noticeably so, I have people that engage but cant vote and I'm atleast thankful for that. They probably save their upvotes for their whale or dolphin steemians for reciprocation. I cant lie though, i enjoy having more "power".
The power is nice and the HF bonus payout gave me enough SP to get the sliding scale, so it doesn't affect me the way it does smaller fish. I think the threshold to get the slider should be lowered to 100SP, so people would have some greater control. I like setting my strength to 30-40% and I can give out dimes all day.