I believe that a community it built on quality of content. I will not comment on a post which add zero value to my life just for the sake of commenting. We can chit chat on discord.
So for example; If I post something of the highest quality which impacts and stimulates people’s minds, they will be more inclined to comment and interact with me. Because I’ve done extensive research on the topic, I am then able to reply back to them with a meaningful answer and multiply the effect.
The point of steemstem should not become a glorified chat group, but, rather a community which produces the highest quality scientific content that people actually want to engage with.
The best magazines, newsapapers, blogs always have the highest traffic and interactions.
The best journal articles have been cited the most.
People will comment if they feel compelled to do so. When I read something that sparks my interest I’m filled with questions.
If I don’t find something interesting or I think it is poorly presented, I won’t engage with it.
If you guys insist that we do so, regardless, then it will just become a fake community who feel obliged to interact with content that doesn’t actually impress them.
I would rather sit in a room with 5 interesting people who know their craft like the back of their hand, than with 100 dim wits who can teach me nothing and waste my time. (I’m being general here, not referring to our community)
Quality always trumps quantity when it comes to science. This refers to the posts and the comments.
Steve Jobs said if you want to make a difference in this world, do great work.
We should feel a sense of prestige to be upvoted by you guys and featured on the distilled post. When people access the the steemstem tag, they must be blown away at the quality of content.
If all this had to happen, I believe everything else will sort itself out.
I have seen a lot of comments concerning quality and one thing keeps coming to my mind, what exactly defines quality? For example, I am a plant specialist who could author a good quality post on plant which will not pique your interest because you don't understand jack about plants.
Quality when it comes science is relative and can only genuinely judged by specialists in each field.
Not necessarily true. What you are referring to is only one point. There are many generic qualities which constitute a 'quality' piece of writing.
Any article can have these qualities, regardless of the topic. The trouble is that most people are not willing to put such effort and give attention to detail. It's all slap-dash, post, give me my money.
Just because a post has a few references in the bib, does not mean that it's of high quality.
Although I fully understand the idea, we have no time for that. We take that into account when we decide how strongly we will vote for a post, but I will never spend time on writing a dedicated review on why we vote in this or that way. This is wasaaaaaaaay too much work.
But don;t worry, we will find out a solution. Thanks for trying to help ^^