You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Voting Abuse and Ineffective Curation: A proposal for blockchain-level change

in #steem7 years ago

As a REAL manual curator for @ocd it is highly unlikely that I will see a post the second it comes out and even if I did, most quality posts would more than take up 5 minutes of time to go through thoroughly. And in the meantime you would not see the myriad of other things being posted. 30 minutes I think is still needed personally.

Sort:  

How many times do you read to the end of a post and decide you would give it different rewards than your initial thought after the first few paragraphs? I'm mostly just curious on this point, but I guess you can see where my thoughts on this are headed: post quality can generally be judged without reading in it's entirety, unless it's just someone being malicious by taking a quality post, then inserting something obnoxious in the middle for laughs. And this really only applies to long posts. One potential solution I've already suggested is that authors could break up such posts into multiple parts. This wouldn't always work, but it would for a lot of long posts.

Haha. Its funny because I actually do change my mind sometimes. Typically it is to vote it higher than I initially was going to because it surpassed expectation and was GREAT instead of good. Its a rare case to change, but my point being, as a curator I try to read majority of the post before voting as often as possible.

Thank you for your honest efforts to bring to the foreground people that may have been overlooked. I know I have found a few people that make excellent post through OCD.

Well, I read posts because I wanna know what they say, not so I can toss a vote off and move along.

I have spent hours reading all the comments and commenting on this post.

I thought that was the purpose of posts? 0_o