Wow... the comments on this post are Mind Blowing! I mean... Boom @themarkymark your patience with these people is exceptional. People need to read and understand the rules of the bot for crying out loud! And don't give me "tell me how it feels when you don't get a refund and if you feel the same" Heard that, and I've done that. I've been riding the line of upvoting posts in the last day so I am never too long separated from my SBD, and you know what? I sent some funds in too late and didn't get a vote. And I didn't cry about it. Because it is in the rules!
Anyway... to the point of the post.
I do think that it is a noble effort to try to curate the muck. Obviously I know where you are coming from. ;-) Knowing that this is an option, I may do it from time to time on posts that I love that, for one reason or another, don't qualify for Curie.
The problem is in the value of $1 SBD right now. People don't want to spend it on someone else if it is worth $13 USD. When you start taking that into account, it gets real expensive real fast. And curation rewards for front running the bot vote aren't going to cover that SBD.
On the other side, what if people just started cycling voting for each other instead of voting for themselves? As soon as you come up with a new policy and announce it, someone is going to figure out an exploit for it. If someone starts a second account just to send bot votes to their main account, then you have to start and maintain a blacklist for people who are trying to game the system. Too much effort for you guys again.
Can you have buildawhale self report? Set up some parameters of what sort of posts you find appealing based on word count, tags, or other measurables through SteemSql that would help narrow the field? SQL queries have been a game changer for Curie, and has made our lives so much easier. seems like you could design something that queries the database for
Upvote from: Buildawhale Post Age < 6 days, Minimum Word Count > 200 OR Minimum Image Count > 3, Vote from cheetah=false.
I don't design the queries, I just use what is provided to me, but doing something like that I am sure Marky could whip up, and that would give you a baseline. If you can't find 5 from that, then you take a deeper dive.
Just a thought.
Thanks @mikepm74,
For the curation, it is at the point where there are just so many bids coming in and most of it is very low effort. I've wanted to do some AI for a while now to reduce the noise so we can focus on the the better content and spend less time doing it.
hey @mikepm74!! I have been racking my brain to try to find a way to cull the unneccessary baloney from our lists to look at, and in actuality, had a brand new thought the moment after this post went live, lol. So I'm sure we'll see some variations of this change.
Marky is highly capable of creating the queries like you mentioned, however I felt like it was important to keep human eyes on the posts as much as possible. Word count, for instance... I've come across some amazing photography with hardly any words at all that I found moving enough to curate for the digest.
I look forward to the next evolution!
xoxo mikey ;)
b.
yeah that is why you do an OR statement in the query, where it gives you word count OR at least X number of images. That would knock out the one line and one picture posts.
Human eyes are extremely important, otherwise curation wouldn't really be curation. It's just creating the tools that get rid of the stuff you know you weren't going to select anyway.
I'm sure you will come up with something great!