The point isn't to directly make some change that attracts investors directly. The idea is to improve the curation system, which in turn makes it more attractive to consume content here (because you find things you are interested in reading more easily). This indirectly can lead to more investors. The other potential "side-effect" is that crypto investors often do look at coin inflation as part of their buying decision. But that's definitely a less important issue, IMO. My goal is mainly to figure out some way to improve what posts get rewarded, so that it's easier to find interesting things to read/look at. From feedback so far, I think the reward window/payout scheme looks like best area to investigate.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Improve the curation system without rewarding the curators ? Do you think, people will invest to curate just to read content and reward the authors ? Unless they themselves are authors, I don't think, many would do that only for curation.
My point is I don't think curators primarily curate for rewards. Because the rewards are much lower than the work involved. At best, the rewards are a bonus for whatever primary reason that curators vote for posts. As a clear example of this, people vote for posts all the time on social media sites such as reddit, without any expectation of a financial reward.
But nonetheless, the suggestion I've seen so far that seems mostly like to improve curation quality is to change reward window/payment algorithm, which would result in more rewards being paid to manual curators vs auto-vote bots under the current status quo.
I do not disagree here but I think, still the rewards gives something back to them which makes them happy, otherwise, they would have just powered down and leave this place, if they are not regular content creators. And definitely if the improved curation quality will result more rewards, then we would see more manual curators, which is also a good thing for content creators.