I have little time in Hive but I prefer to publish in Leofinance, so I would like to share my opinion in this space. I think there should be a big debate in the community corresponding to what is considered a quality publication. I agree with many in this post that quality should be the main north for curations, however it is necessary to establish a great agreement on what kind of work or response is worthy of receiving upvotes.
On the one hand the authors must share their work respecting the rules of this web portal, that is, publications dedicated to topics related to cryptocurrencies from a financial analysis to how they have changed our lives. Obviously if you make a post that is not in line with Leofinance's raison d'être you should not expect to be rewarded with upvotes.
Now should responses be curated...of course they should, but only those worthy of consideration for this effect. You can't expect a response of three words or less to be an upvotes winner, nor can you expect one that doesn't keep some coherence with the main note. I particularly appreciate reading the discussions and as much as possible participating in them, because great ideas are generated around the discussions raised by an author's work, the best answers should somehow be rewarded with the curators' permission, at least I think so.
What I like about Leofinance is its ability to promote discussions and probe the opinion of community members for the benefit of all, I am very happy to be part of this and to some extent collaborate to make our cryptoeconomics portal a unique space on the web and in the world of virtual currencies. Greetings to all.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta