I think it would be wise to address the cause of this voting behavior, rather than removing the rewards system entirely because of the behavior the system encourages.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think it would be wise to address the cause of this voting behavior, rather than removing the rewards system entirely because of the behavior the system encourages.
I absolutely agree on not removing the system entirely. But I support the idea of reviewing it. Because currently we vote on content that
That´s a quite small corridor which leads to rewards-driven voting instead of content-driven voting. If we should address the cause we would need to address our own money-driven behavior, don´t we?
If this system wasn't set up to encourage those problems you mentioned, they would go away and the rest of us could enjoy an audience that gets paid to enjoy content.
Peope are not here for curation rewarda. It is just that the reward system corrupts one of the most important functionalities of a social media network which is voting.
It seems like a lot of people are here to blog in some way, shape or form. These bloggers need an audience. Many bloggers use bots to auto vote, which is fine if they're doing it to support the author's they like and lack the time to do so manually. The blogger is either working on their next presentation or away doing other things.
A proper, fully functional curation reward system marketed to the masses is a great way to encourage an audience to show up and participate. A good incentive.
Unfortunately, I don't have time to repeat much of what I've been saying. If you're curious as to how I feel about it, have a look around the comment section.
Well it´s a dynamic system and we are here to constantly improve it, so let´s just see what we can do to make it even better :)
Steemit can be a very productive round table at times. ...and some days people are getting smashed through tables like wrestlers. That's life.