You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: "We need good content" But who defines what's good enough?

in #timeforachange8 years ago

I somewhat agree with you, but this:

The whales actually have good taste and upvote quality content that is highly appreciated by hundreds of others, like for real.

What's this ?

The whales are ordinary people with their own biases, points of views, narrowed by their life experiences and areas of interest.

NOBODY can be a "good taste"/"quality content" judge. No even a writer, a psychologist, a marketing manager, content manager, creative, etc. Nobody.

You know why ? Because this is a platform without any theme. For an art gallery there are curators. For a science magazine there are scientists-editors, for a game there is a game designer.
Do you think Zuckerberg is the most qualified person for Facebook ? No. He has a team. But he has the decision (part of it). That's all. Has the decision.

So, whales are just people. With power. They are not better or worse than me/you. But they decide what's the future of Steemit. That's all.

I didn't want to be too aggressive but I disagree with that quote. I agree for 75 % with your statements.

Peace.

Sort:  

You're right, good taste is subjective and strictly relates to the individual expressing it. Used in the same context as Steemit quality content I think there is a line that can be drawn, from a majority point of view, to what is quality/non-quality without too much expertise behind the curtain :)
Upvote herding will happen on quality content. Again quality can be considered subjective, as you've pointed out above, but the majority of whales/users will pretty much have it in the same scope I think (content informative level, originality, catchy titles, good language control, formatting, visuals etc.).

PS. I always appreciate feedback @fishborne, never see it as aggressive unless..you know, it's aggressive (is aggressiveness subjective too? hahah).

No, no aggressivity here. Just exchanging opinions like adults. :)