You seem to have this weird fallacy that just because you put a lot of effort and quality into a post you should be curated when you are new. Where does this idea come from, honestly? Do you think content creators on youtube, twitch, personal blogs, medium, literally any other platform instantly start making money? Or do you think it may take months until they may start seeing even a tiny amount of revenue, with few exceptions that make it big fast.
It's really tiring hearing the same argument over and over on a platform that's more newbie friendly than literally all of the others combined. We're so newbie friendly that there's people literally pretending to be others to post their content for "easy rewards" that make life harder for curators. What sets us apart is that we're young, small and incentivized to go out and curate new users because we want people to stick around and be part of this experiment and share the benefits the ecosystem under one currency brings to all of us, big or small. These same incentives don't exist on other platforms, unless they turn you into their content.
You're literally replying to a comment of mine where I state that I curated this user randomly before I wrote this post, as I was browsing the recently created filter of all posts on the platform. I do that from time to time (and I imagine others do too) even though it's kind of annoying to sift through a ton of "junk" posts or posts from dapps I'm not really interested in curating so I usually stick to the community feeds or my own following feed. Do you think YouTubers or other content creators of other platforms go and browse the "new" section often?
I'm not generally against short posts being curated but it depends a lot if there's interest and consumption of them, take this post for example. If someone else made this and got 0-1 responses but some stakeholders voted it up to the same levels I wouldn't deem it reasonable or fair that the author gets away with those rewards, especially if those upvoters had a track history of abusive upvotes.
Ha ha ha. How funny. Newbie. I've been here since then, just like you. We have the same registration year. You registered 2 days earlier than me. Experienced user =))) Ha-ha-ha
Did it ever occur to you, my friend, that if such arguments are often heard, then they make sense?? Or do they sound just for beauty? I'm not going to argue. I don't want this. I'm just surprised at how much text you wrote. Did my message hurt you? =)
I was only a little hooked by the message - the argument about short posts. It seems to me that it doesn't matter at all.
I saw posts where there is one photo and there is already money there. How do you know if it's quality or not? Everyone has their own vision of quality. That's why I said that curating is the biggest bullshit on this platform. It doesn't mean that the platform is terrible, but its concept is not clear to me.
I don't know how to make money with posts. So I just talk to people. Sometimes.
No, didn't hurt me, just annoying how some people like to blame the platform while they haven't done anything of value to grow alongside others. I may be an exception with delegation I've received from curation but there's many others who've started around the same time and grown just as much if not more over the years. They've found something they're good at, that brings value to the ecosystem and users in one way shape or form and the ecosystem has continually rewarded that. You must be one of the other guys.
If the concept of curation isn't clear to you by now then you're really not put in any effort to figure anything out. The issue I have is that you're blaming curation and the ecosystem as a whole rather than looking at your own activities and history and figuring out why it hasn't been working, which I wrote you a comment letting you know what may be the issue but not like I'm going to go out of my way to continue this conversation any longer.