I like. Auto votes have become like curation squatting. Anything that can break break this cycle of the same authors shooting to trending at 5 minutes and giving genuine cuaratirs a fair share of the pie are worth a try. This proposal seems to be well thought through.
My only concern is that trying to get those with most to lose behind the idea would be difficult even though it would be better for everyone long term.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I don't think there would be a drastic change in terms of curation rewards.
Those people currently "winning" at curation (mainly through bots and auto-voting?) would get a little less. Those people who typically vote late (manual curators and curation communities?) would get a little more. There would be more curation paid out overall due to the removal of curation rewards going back to the reward pool in the first 5 minutes.
My guess is that there are quite a few whales (and curation communities like @ocd) who would do better under flat curation than they do currently and who could get behind the idea.
Hopefully the bigger change would be quality authors getting larger author payouts through better curation. Particularly newer and less well known authors.
This could bring an increase in retention of new quality authors. And a rise in quality posting to chase those bigger rewards.
Sorry for delayed response. All you say sounds good and I hope the idea is given serious thought.
!ENGAGE15