She is not a newbie. She knows what she's doing with these posts - farming rewards, nothing else.
A downvote is not a flag. A downvote is a reward adjustment. That's how the distribution algorithm works, did you read the whitepaper?
Why should I as a witness not use the blockchain in the way it was intended? Being a witness is about running a node for the chain, being independent and reliable. Caring about anyone's rewards is not part of the job description.
Well, if you can use the blockchain in the way it was intended why can't she farm rewards then? Obviously, farming rewards is also one of the intended uses. That's how algorithm works. Or is this another case of "rules for thee, but not for me"?
She can, of course, and I will always support her right to post whatever she wants.
She's not entitled to be successful monetizing it though.
In an ideal world, all farmers and circlejerkers and botposters would be downvoted and really good content rise to the top. We're not in an ideal world, but that doesn't stop me from doing my part.
I sincerely hope that, in time, you will manage to rise above this petty and divisive mentality.
You are a witness, a very important constituent here. And yet, here you are, arguing that a small minnow must not 'successfully monetize' her content because apparently $3 is enough for her and $6 is already too much. And the rationale is... she is posting pics, not walls of text?
What an absurd waste of time and resources for a witness 😔
I'm not involved in the daily operations of curangel at all. I stand behind the team though. I wouldn't have gotten involved in the discussion here if you wouldn't have tagged me with an inaccuracy.
But I also don't see how how I spend my time has anything to do with my abilities to help secure the chain.
Your team lives in the past, upvoting essays that could have easily been written by ChatGPT, while downvoting authentic pics that have been proven to be from real people. Time to rethink the whole thing.
You're always getting to conclusions way too quickly, without being informed properly.
Our downvote criteria go way beyond the number of words. If someone cranks out an essay full of empty words every day to grab rewards from the autovotes following them, these posts are as eligible as these photo posts.
We have been doing this job for years, and we know what we are doing. Of course you are entitled to your opinon, but maybe understand how things work before you form one and spout it around next time.
Are you telling me that your team can recognize ChatGPT's work and downvote it? Yeah, right. Nowadays, not even experts can distinguish between ChatGPT's work and work done by PhDs.
The indisputable fact remains and you don't even try to deny it: your curation team has established a practice of downvoting short posts with selfies i.e. precisely those that ChatGPT cannot replicate. This practice creates an obstacle for genuine user-generated content and encourages the submission of fake AI-generated texts.