They are amazing yes! But I'm not upset about not winning. By the way, I've already won a WOTW and I even have NTF of that. I really don't care about winning but about participating and encouraging. I hope you didn't misunderstand what I said before. It was just a question to @scholaris if he had also noticed about it ^^
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I noticed too @hranhuk,
It is evidence that there is a need to expand the contest. That is why I invited my friend to join. If pob-wotw is going to last then we are going to need new challenges and at the same time every contestant needs some kind of affirmation and perhaps a little guidance. Last week @nonsowrites also addressed his concerns about those who entered but were not getting high scores. He gave detailed advice that could give some extra points if they were followed. I think that was a good move and that post should be promoted.
Just to add: one of the problems of a merit system is that the best always take the top spot. Except we don't want this competition to be based on merit, then we might see something different.
We are also trying to factor in other things so the ratings aren't solely based on the quality of the post but also the quality of engagement. It is a work in progress.
This was the point I wanted to get to!
WOTW is a total success!
With the magnitude of the "event" many people are engaged in the contest. But when it starts to be the same winners, will others continue to be motivated to win?
Taking advantage and answering here @scholaris
That was my long-term concern. The motivation. I cannot speak for myself. I will always write and participate, even if I never make it to the top 5 hahaha
But what about the others? How will they see this?
That's why I once suggested a voting stand for everyone who participates in WOTW (or any other official pob contest). Where all participants who fit within the rules and have a "minimum specific score" of the classification will receive good votes from the POB (a fixed amount for everyone), but I know that for this I would have to have support from other whales in the contest and responsibility for this. Which at the moment I don't see being possible. We would have to wait to gather more POBs and have other accounts that really want to help with this curation ;)
A voting stand or a minimum curation based upon scoring. I've been playing with that idea at a certain price range and score. Given the level of scrutiny we publicly give the articles, it's definitely doable. However, I won't do that for every article at this time.
One problem with the concept is that everyone has their own definition of minimum. Also, one person's high quality article could be low quality in someone else's eyes and vice versa. People are going to vote how they wish with their stake.
The score would be minimal from the contest rules. Regardless of the taste of each type of person.
And the total amount of winnings will vary depending on the taste of each person voting. What I mean by having a "minimum" vote would be from the support account for the curation of the contest.
Now what each person votes and how much they want to vote is not the case. You understand?
There's no support account at this time. I definitely understand what you mean by a minimum, though.
Yes, I really know that there is no way to give all this support at the moment, even due to the stake value and few accounts supporting it.
It would be good for @proofofbrainio to distribute more delegations.
Wow, that's good to hear. Keep it up friend, I liked your recent curation report, you are really doing amazing work. 😊👍. !PIZZA
@hranhuk! I sent you a slice of $PIZZA on behalf of @vikbuddy.
Learn more about $PIZZA Token at hive.pizza (4/10)
Thanks!
!LUV
<><
@vikbuddy, you've been given LUV from @hranhuk.
Check the LUV in your H-E wallet. LUV changes soon. (1/1)