RE: Instructions, FAQs, and the very first “Request for Submissions” (for original content via the Proof of Blind project)

[erh.germany]

Hi there,

I am not quite sure how to evaluate this project ...

For no tool exists to effectively detect plagiarism. A related debate with Hive-Watchers has highlighted such. Manual sifting and matching is necessary to detect plagiarism. How do you guarantee that those who are entrusted with this task will do it flawlessly? I don't think you can promise that, and the question of how careful these plagiarism checks can actually be is open to question. Rather, I think that the mere announcement of wanting to carry out this check should build trust. Where, for example, a plagiarism check fails and someone who is not paid to do such a check would probably be quite embarrassing for the operators.

So I think this benefit is rather small and not necessarily a USP.

I see it more as a psychological barrier that takes several steps to make those who would submit plagiarism aware of it, thereby appealing to their conscience from the outset. Of course, someone who doesn't care and skips this stumbling block with ease will still not be deterred :) The more effort someone makes with stolen content, the more difficult it is to expose him as a plagiarist, and at some point it has reached a limit where such content can hardly be identified.

I haven't really understood the rest yet. Is it the case that if I wanted to make my content available here, I would first visibly insert my entire post, including text and images, into the comments section, then delete it and make it available for re-viewing? Still don't understand how that preserves the anonymity of the authors ...

---

Edit:
alright, I see it now. Just followed it to the site.

... I don't know. Maybe, if a person has only one account and wants to post something, which one usually would not do under ones profile, this could be a way to cover up the identity.

It also could be fun to test whether readers can be attracted when not relating the content to a known name and so be more "unbiased". That would require not to sift through the commentators section in order to not being tempted to guessing authors. LOL

All in all it sounds complicated with the repair stuff, in case some one is detected later on as a copy and paster.

Comments

[blind.submit]

no tool exists to effectively detect plagiarism.

We are using some of the best available technology. However, you are correct -- no tool is perfect or fully effective. At some point, we may offer bounties for those who discover plagiarism that we missed, to increase the stakes and make the system even more robust.

Is it the case that if I wanted to make my content available here, I would first visibly insert my entire post, including text and images, into the comments section, then delete it and make it available for re-viewing?

That is correct. After you delete it and replace the content with "Ready for review" we will retrieve the deleted content and begin the review.

Still don't understand how that preserves the anonymity of the authors ...

There is no absolute anonymity implied (only a blind upvote process). In fact, the intent of the project is to get relatively unknown authors recognized. Mostly, their recognition will come via the weekly leaderboard updates. However, a curator who likes a given post can easily check to see who the author is (by looking at the beneficiary list), then follow that author.

[erh.germany]

Alright, thanks for your answers.

I just copy you my idea, which I already commented on the deleted proofofblind post.

How about content from one, two or three years ago, posted, for example, on Steemit? Some of my works I would like to give fresh live to. They sunk into the depth of the chain or were not read by many people, were not catching many votes, but still have potential to catch interest this time than they did in the past? I wouldn't be able to write it better than I did in the past.

Why not including my own work, where I put many hours and efforts into and make them visible again? None of those publications appeared anywhere else but on the blockchain, and as we all know, almost no one surfs single blogs for contents older than 7 days (or, say a months or two). This would be a good opportunity to profit more than once, since the readership and members of the blockchain changed quite a lot.

I don't think it's necessary to be so slavish about declaring one's own content "ad acta" and thus "done for all time". All that would be needed is the additional passage that this is a publication that has already taken place, no?

Do you have high-stake-accounts on board?

Back in the old days, for example with steemstem, you could expect with a high probability that your submission would be significantly voted or visited/commented.

[bobthebuilder2]

Several of us have already followed the account to upvote it, giving it a higher probability of a sizeable upvote.

[erh.germany]

I have no idea how to put myself on a voting-trail since I left Steemit and abandoned all further devices. I tried to un-delegate my delegation to SteemSTEM and did so in steemworld.org, but for some strange reason, my hive account still shows this delegation (also another one to a single user who blogs no more). If that is what you were talking about. Or do you just follow manually?

[bobthebuilder2]

I follow it manually. Someone just did a post on how to join a trail. Maybe you can find it on the site, I don't know the site, and cut it there? I like holding the power of my vote in my hands but also understand the value of letting a trail curate for you.

[erh.germany]

I switched from auto- to manual vote where it was possible. For my old trails, they stay, for I don't know how to take them back into my hands (until I find someone who knows). Thanks for the info.