Thank you for mentioning me, I will state my opinion on the subject.
After reading several reviews in the comments, today I decided to stop voting for burning posts the way it is happening at the moment. I will contribute again if it is done in a different way.
Rather than just sending the reward to @null, I think it could be done in a way that helps the community.
Burning posts can become publicity posts, since instead of sending directly to limbo, @madstacks could take that value and promote quality publications.
This way you will be sending to @null, but at the same time helping someone who is producing original content for our community.
What do you think?
I think instead of voting a low effort post to fund a promotion of another, you should simply find that other and vote it up. That's what us curators are supposed to do. I browse the Proof of Brain Community every day, I go to the New Tag and then I click "Proof of Brain" on the left hand side and read through things.
Yes, I also follow the same method of going to the New tab, and in some I also visit the payout to see if I have forgotten one with quality
Glad to see your response @vempromundo. I was concerned when I saw your vote on the post because I wasn't sure how this would reflect for your curation trail. I understand the thinking behind the votes, like I mentioned in the post, but I feel like the method isn't benefitting the platform in the long run and the value of the token is being misconstrued in a certain sense.
@leprechaun, again, raises the simple solution of just finding someone who may need a little boost if you're struggling to find someone to vote on. Make someone's day with your fat 100% upvote and spur them on to stick with the platform.
After I started to understand how the trail works, he decides not to vote for the Burn Post anymore, but to focus on the strategy that @leprechaun said