I've been noticing some vote-trading going on again and I just felt the need to write a quick post reminding people of why this should be frowned upon, some examples of where this is bad, some examples of where this is okay, etc. I'm sure there are others who've noticed it too and I'll be talking to some other curation projects if they have any idea of how we could deal with this. I want to mention here though that dealing with it I don't encourage people to "zero" posts out completely, vote-trading happens for a reason and one reason only, higher ROI (which I will explain below) so small downvotes to encourage curation instead of mindless automated vote-trading is better in the long haul and causes less drama and alienation of those users practicing it.
For starters, a short reminder of what the EIP consisted of.
Change from 25/75 to 50/50 curator/author rewards.
A "tax" curve gradually diminishing in power up to 20 hive rewards of total vote value.
25% additional downvote mana.
Not gonna keep this long, most of us remember how things were like pre-EIP. Most stake was being delegated to bid bots, they were selling profitable votes to authors. If you weren't delegating to a bid bot you were losing out on a lot of rewards, bid bot owners were taking a cut for themselves and authors had to pay to receive very low ROI on their posts than receiving genuine curation. Some didn't delegate to bid bots and wanted to eliminate the "middleman" which was understandable back then because, why give these bots a cut if you can just vote-trade your way to the same ROI? Now this is what I want to point out cause bid bots (after some downvote initiatives pushing them to not sell profitable votes but only sell votes if the authors really wanted the attention/promotion which let's be honest not many wanted cause of a small userbase and barely any bids are happening anymore) stopped operating the same way and the EIP didn't make it feasible for them to attempt to sell profitable votes and they had to settle for "curation" instead. Vote-trading is not as easily identifiable as tracking bids and votes being cast shortly after and seeing if they're profitable or not, so let's talk about that.
User A with 100k HP is often voting on User B with 10k HP and vice versa. Is this vote-trading?
In a way but also no, user A is not receiving the same or similar value back from user B. If this was point blank vote-trading the two users would be in a similar class of stake/ vote strength (could be delegated/leased as well).
User A with 100k HP is very often voting on user B with 100k HP, they are both consistent authors and share interest or have similar genre content. Is this vote-trading?
In a way also, but here's the difference to "abusive" vote-trading. These users have a lot of things in common with each other. If they both post about the same things, in the same niche communities and often read and interact with each other there's not much you can do to try and break that off. Let the penalty curation curve handle it (by that I mean front-runners that will continue to push the front-running earlier and earlier into the 5min window meaning the "vote-traders" will eventually face lower and lower curation rewards until at some point they decide they prefer voting on other authors because of ROI - if not, if they value each others content so much or the vote-trading/author rewards then that's also okay because they'll be losing out to others who are earning more curation rewards from them or others)
Now let's get into some of the abusive cases.
User A with 100k HP votes on User B with 100k HP not just very often but on each and every post and they are both consistent with the posting. Furthermore, looking at their content there are no similarities between the two, they may be speaking different languages, posting about completely different topics, etc. The abuse here is that the only thing they share with each other is imilar stake and vote-strength and an agreement to vote on each others posts to either get past the 20 hive tax curve so they don't lose out on that or to constantly get attention/trending and not lose out on voting late on other posts/not front-running because they receive max of both curation rewards and author rewards.
What you need to understand here also is that having a bigger circle of vote-trading agreements means it's pretty much the same as voting for yourself 10x per day. Remember the change to 50/50 and the curve that rewards you more for being early to upvote content that will earn a lot of post rewards, they make this incentive obsolete because they're earning both author and curation rewards.
Here's an example, two users with the same stake always voting each other is not a big problem, unless their votes are so big that they both pass the tax curve. This can of course happen with stake that's a little lower if they incentivize front-runners by voting past 5mins or later, but the real problem is that smaller stakeholders have now realized that by grouping together they can avoid the tax curve and still vote-trade even 1 post per day of each other as if they were self-voting with high enough strength to reach the tax curve 10x per day.
Think about it, a 5 hive vote vs another 5 hive vote will just get you to 10 hive rewards with your self-vote included, you'll face some of the tax penalty only reaching it halfway (exact amounts don't necessarily have to be 20 hive but for the sake of this example let's say that's what it is). So what they do here is add more similarly large stakeholders into the group to get another 2 votes to reach 20 hive and at the same time also vote them on their 1 post daily. You can see that they'll just need 10 users in their circle with a max vote of 2 hive to maximize it on all fronts with just one post per day.
Now naturally the way you can notice these accounts is that
- Their top curators are always the same accounts
- These accounts differ in many ways to each other's content except the stake or leased stake is the same
- Their content often lacks engagement, diverse voters
Now why is this wrong?
Well, with the EIP in mind each account has to either settle with a highest ROI possible by curation, some do this by front-running, only voting on posts with no prior votes, having a large trail behind them, etc. This all requires curation, though, some work and if they suck at it or vote up garbage on purpose just to maximize they'll risk receiving those downvotes which the downvote mana pool was mainly added for.
Vote-traders circumvent this by autovoting each other on an agreement they've made. This means that there could be accounts that have only leased hivepower that are now receiving the same benefits as accounts with skin in the game earning ROI for both curating and also posting, even if their stake is way lower than being able to just self-vote themselves to the 20 hive tax curve barrier. They ignore the curation competition and content discovery completely, they don't care about maximizing curation rewards or helping distribution to more unique accounts because they're already receiving minimal curation returns but max author returns. An agreement of 5-10 accounts voting on eachother's one post per day is already enough (depending on stake) as to self-vote 10x per day, remember that.
So the question then, what can we do about these "obvious" vote-traders that have nothing in common with each other and keep ignoring "the rules of the game". Well, the answer is downvotes, disincentivize them from just vote-trading on eachother by removing part of their author rewards and curation rewards. At the same time they'll have to start curating content from other authors because the sole purpose they were vote-trading and created this agreement was for ROI anyway so they'll look for ROI in other ways.
Now of course this is easier said than done, retaliation is possible either by directly downvoting your content or votes you're casting at others no matter if those are genuine or not. As you can see this would cause a sort of war where collateral damage would occur from authors who have nothing to do with it starting to receive downvotes just because you've been voting them up.
Rest assured that this has happened before, though, and on the previous chain it was way more difficult to control because there was a big split in stake and how they viewed the EIP, genuine curation and treated our rewardpool like a brain dead proof of stake shitcoin, go check out steemit.com front-page if you want to see it in action.
Now having said that I realize things aren't perfect here but they're a lot better and we should try to improve constantly in the ways that the rules of the chain make it possible. Smart downvotes can already do a lot to incentives better behavior and less "abusive" vote-trading.
My advice is that if all you care about is stake ROI than this is not the best dpos chain for you. So instead of leasing hivepower and agree with folks similar of your vote strength to practically self-vote 10x per day and shit on our distribution and at the same time curators who don't care about ROI but curate with the best intentions of trending, distribution and retention in mind... sooner or later you're going to have a bad time and regret it. Realize there's another path to receive votes on your content. Try to engage with the community, connect with other likeminded users, share the love around and realize this chain is strongest with a better distribution. Taking shortcuts just to get a few K more hive at the end of the year while having your posts look like a deserted ghost town that someone for some reason still rewards will both make your few K hive worth less in value or you'll get others to dislike you cause you're just riding on their efforts back without providing any value yourself.
Anyway, this was kind of ranty as I'm a little worked up by some other issues I'm annoyed at lately so take it with a grain of salt, I'll come back to this issue with a calmer mind later and discuss it with some other stakeholders of the best way to proceed with discouraging this kind of vote-trading.
Have you noticed some of this vote-trading lately? I mean the great thing about the blockchain is that everything is public and can easily be traced. Wouldn't surprise me if we had analytical tools in the near future that would set out to search for these kind of activities and alert people once a certain quota of what might be considered "abusive" votetrading is filled. No need to name names, most of us are aware of who they are because the tax doesn't let very small accounts maximize on vote-trading and those who do are easily noticeable, but just wondering if you've also noticed it and wondered what could be done to discourage it then this post will hopefully let you know that there are ways and others are also noticing it and wanting to do something about it. We just gotta handle it with care and not go apeshit on their rewards cause there's enough drama to go around already over the rewardpool, so much so that some are considering if it would be best to eliminate it completely. :rolling_eyes:
the exchange vote is currently in place in 80% of the witnesses, if they do not change first this, that is useless to worry about the votes on the platform
I think there will be a big change there after the next hardfork.
let's hope!
What changes in the next upgrade are meant to deal with this issue? I've seen nothing about this topic mentioned by the devs...
30 day cooldown for stake of newly powered up accounts to count towards witness voting - stakeholders feeling more secure from a possible attack and possibly reverting their votes back to non top 20 witnesses.
For me the problem is, that there is no good content to look for on Hive.
I very rarely upvote because I like the content, I usually upvote because I have been upvoted by the person or I just happen to follow him and I need to lower my voting power (too close to 100%)
Eh, I dunno if there's no good content to vote, I find a lot daily but then again I also do this full time so I understand others don't have the same amount of time to look and I hope communities will improve on that. Either to make it easier for readers and stakeholders to know where to look but at the same time increase the quality cause the authors in each community will be competing versus another to provide better and better content not just for the rewards but also for the limelight. If you don't have the time to look for content then of course there's nothing wrong with just voting here and there, the problem is consistent same sized votes on the same authors over and over and over again.
How are you doing this full time? O.O
By working on Hive related things 10h+ a day? :D
Good one, I meant how is Hive paying enough to be able to do that full time?
Or is Hive just a hobby, while having some other source of income? (hive-roller.com? 😏)
Just curious, maybe I'm spending my time on the wrong stuff. 😂
PS: Just realized that this could be interpreted wrong: I'm not amused by the amount of work, I'm amused by the straight answer to my question. Could have used a better question. My mistake though.
Some from Hive, most from Steem, some from other assets and trading. Gotta admit Steem rekt me pretty hard though when I decided to not sell any at the top and double down at $2+ but had to sell a lot at 40-10c.
😍
I would love to see a post about your trading, strategies, thoughts and stuff like that. Could be really interesting!
I have also sold at those prices, I think, but it was more or less a zero sum game for me.
Thanks for the answer, always nice to hear how someone is getting along and the blockchain, but I would have never guessed the trading part! 👍
on top of that the witnesses decided to take 20k+ steem from me in their recent hardfork. :)
Damn, sorry for your loss. Lost the track of who has lost how much in the hostile takeover and the aftermath.
I'm just glad that I got out with most of my money and transferred that to Hive. But I really wish this chapter would have gone way different and I have to admit: I'm really sad when I look at the current state of Steem and the trending post. Not the language difference but just the state of it. Centralization at it's finest.
At least we got most of the community over here and working now on a new goal. It gives at least hope for the future and Hive is probably one of the best things that happened in 2020. (Okay I know the competition isn't that hard, but at least it's something.^^)
I've got a question regarding a "toxic" topic and I could need an honest unfiltered opinion from someone who understand the community and the chain.
@therealwolf has posted the following: https://peakd.com/hive-102930/@therealwolf/will-hive-stay-a-niche-blockchain-and-die
Before @azircon was downvoted, he has raised the issue, that @therealwolf is upvoting @hivedapps.com automated posts, an account which he owns. (I'm not a fan of the rude accusations thrown at @therealwolf, but I think the fact is: Automated posts are getting upvoted to over 10 Hive in rewards, which I think is way too much.)
After that he has published his proposal https://peakd.com/hive/@therealwolf/proposal-hivedapps-com-infrastructure-and-maintenance for covering the costs.
But I learned just today (thanks to the downvotes from him for me) that he is still upvoting those automated posts to over 10 Hive.
Because I cannot find anything else on this topic: Is this behavior determined "okay" by the community? Is this just something to accept, because he cannot get funded from the proposal? Should I cease my downvotes, start upvoting those posts for curation rewards and start my own automated post series?
I hope, that I'm not too rude or annoying right now, but I'm feeling quite lost for seeing a witness acting in this way.
Honestly I don't know why he bothers voting those up, what's 10 hive per day for someone who has close to a million hive. I guess the decision is yours if you want to post automated posts and vote those up, many may not say anything or do anything but they'll surely be thinking things. At the end of the day and in the long term I don't see money being an issue for people and I believe they'll ease into not caring as much about ROI or their self interest and be more open to using their stake for the growth of the platform. Now of course this isn't just directed at therealwolf, there are plenty of people who lay low and just maximize while others do it and pretend to do good. There's enough people here today that the majority will remember and if they don't it'll still be on chain in case someone's interested enough later.
Anyway, voting automated posts is a bit of a gray area when done with your own stake, there's accounts like penguinpablo who've done this in forever and for many they bring value, while others say they use the rewards for costs. :shrug:
Personally the only acceptable automated posts I'd vote up would be something where the rewards are used in the communities best interest or returned to them. For instance the daily twitter stats by @hiro-hive which he tips back to people through twitter or the @poshtoken once the bot is finally fully fixed and posting distribution stats daily to pay the dev for his work cause it's something all of hive will benefit from existing.
Thanks for the recognition @acidyo, I appreciate that you mention us. I agree to all that you said here, I also think the only acceptable automated posts would be something where the rewards are used in the communities best interests or returned to them.
Personally, I am happy doing this #Hive tipping our most active users on twitter and as far as I am concerned in my observations, the people who talked relentlessly on other social media about Hive has skin in the game, I mean they do not only love this community for one day or one week or one month, most of them are deserving part of our family. For this, I have no problem supporting them daily just to stay motivated and inspired. If you have thoughts in mind, I am open to new ideas. Stay blessed @acidyo :))
for your thoughts. Gave me some mindfood to chew on.
Guess I will just cease the downvotes for now and fix my witness voting proxy. Should be fine after that.
It seems that the moment where rewards are playing a role, it's always a haggle between everybody just for the sake of getting something out of it. Quite sad to see such an approach from a witness. (Or penguinpablo for that case, at least those statistics were interesting.)
Btw, Just added @hiro-hive and you to my voting list. 😌
One thing I'd like to add is, even if you're an anonymous user, treat the chain and token as if you had a lot of people you know IRL on here and they can see your every move. Even if that's not the case now it could be in the future. Would suck if they joined, recognized you somehow and found out everyone thinks you're an asshole who got most of his stake in some shitty ways. :D
That's one solid advice, I have to give you that.
Good thing that I'm mostly fine with the stuff I have done so far. 😏
Jokes aside, I guess I should try to write more stuff and things like that. I wish there would be the option to hide every vote and downvote, so the reward system would be running in the background. Because after posting, I'm feeling like most youtubers:
1.) I've stopped auto-voting on them, but since the proposal isn't funded yet and the infrastructure costs are still going, I've voted them manually, fully well knowing that they will be downvoted, so the initial vote was higher than before to combat it.
2.) You're being ignorant if the only thing you're seeing are automated posts. It's not about them being automated, it's about where the rewards are going. And clearly, they're going into a project that brings value to Hive.
Real Talk
So because I'm a block producer, I can't give you some of the same downvote sauce back, that you so ignorantly put on my posts, because they're automated?!
If I wanted to abuse the reward pool, I would do it completely different, as so many ppl are already doing. Like, start posting some of those nice ai-generated/ google-translated posts into GEMs or OCDB categories? Would that be okay, since they're not "automated"? I would also promise to use @reward.app and sell those rewards right when they come in, instead of hodling it..
But because I'm transparently posting automated posts by a project I've built and upvote them WITH MY OWN STAKE after a day of waiting time, with the goal to use those rewards FOR the project, as it has REAL ONGOING COSTS, its okay to downvote it or create hate-speech against it?
THAT is one of the biggest reasons why the global rewards pool is so damn stupid to work with. If I would farm my own posts 10x per day, I could understand people going against it, but ONCE per day for a project that actually brings value to Hive WITH MY OWN STAKE?!
And @acidyo, why does it matter how much HIVE I have? This is about principles. If I can't even upvote a project of mine ONCE per day WITH MY OWN STAKE without the downvote police coming along, harassing me and questioning my morality, then what the fuck are we doing here?
I think you're underestimating the effort and work curators put in not to reward your idea of abusing the rewardpool, it's true some may go undetected for some time and having to deal with assholes running hivewatchers who are supposed to help with that is also a pain, but yeah it's definitely an attack vector if big stakeholders actively attempt to do that and when found out can just plead ignorance and that they didn't know it was ai-generated/etc. There you may start noticing a pattern though and your reputation can quickly go down the drain.
Anyway, like I said I wasn't really talking about you and automated posts aren't completely worthless or not worthy of rewards depending on how they're used. I hope your proposal gets supported and many others use that gateway instead of the rewardpool for such things. We'd need an easier entry point for that into getting funded though cause right now it seems close to impossible - like why is dapplr still not being funded after all the proof and usability of their work and dapp they've already shown us.
and ehh, why does how much stake matter, i mean, i've seen you use it to reason that your opinions should have more weight about the future of the platform and your proposed changes, so I don't see anything wrong with pointing out that you have a lot of stake so not sure why you bother voting up those posts to pay a fraction of the costs of hivedapps. Hivedapps is not just helping everyone else but your own stake as well, it would seem in your best interest to also keep it up to help the value of your stake instead of trying to also make up for that "cost". I realize there's many using the pool and proposals for their own projects so they don't have any costs associated with it and I'm not a big fan of that personally. At some point, with a certain amount of stake you should be okay to pay for some things from own pocket that help hive, if people were less ROI focused the platform would be a much better place imo. Now again this isn't just about you, but think about it, if @freedom would focus on growing the value of his stake by trailing or delegating it more diversely to bring hive to new heights he could afford losing a couple % of ROI. Instead we're so focused on the rewardpool that we're literally gambling on other blockchains surpassing us and doing what we do better because we keep pointing and comparing with others and avoid doing the work or sacrifice it would take to bring help the platform. The higher the stake you own the bigger should be your incentive to help hive, keep building, keep spending some hive and not keep comparing with others or try and outperform them. Some will just maximize and abuse no matter if hive makes it or doesn't, only thing that'll matter is what people think you did. At least personally I'm going to care if I was on the side that helped hive succeed or tried or if I was on the side who made a lot of stake and then went passive and hoped others would take care of the rest.
Anyway, chill a bit man, you seem a bit overly stressed lately through your posts and comments. Don't let the markets affect you too much, hive is hive, it's so different from other cryptos and even tho some look at the lack of movement in price and think it'll be our undoing, others realize it may lag behind in movement due to the way it's distributed and speculators won't push the price up if there's people selling at any price. What some think is something wrong with it will be what sets it aside from the rest, on top of that social media is way harder to get right and needs a lot bigger userbase until it starts seeing some real change in value and onboarding. There's a lot of competition out there but most lack our experience, growth, fairness, distribution and investment not just monetary but sweat equity and the potential they see in it. We've come a long way and the platform is better than it ever was.
May be we can all take a step back and think this through @therealwolf. I think you have muted me, so maybe what I write does not matter. But still since I made the comment on your automated posts, it is my duty to try and put some reasoning into this discussion.
Question of morality comes in only because it is a social network. You are a block producer, you are asking the community to vote you. Right?
You made a proposal. You are asking community to support you. Right? Why don’t you ask it nicely? Because if the community don’t like your morality they may choose not to vote your witness, or your proposal.
Nobody cares what you do with your stake/money until it harms something. If you had some disposable income nobody cares what you do in your island. But if you come outside and asking people for something, may I please recommend to ask nicely. If you make a proper case the community might support your proposal. Why don’t you lobby for it?
Too much of the top content is meta. I love reading posts about Hive, but give me stuff about non hive. I don't go on reddit to learn more about reddit. No I go because I can see some cool shit on so many other topics.
That's why communities will improve things, imo. I barely check trending anymore, but trending of communities I subscribe to is a lot better.
You're not looking hard enough? I'm finding good content pretty much every day, @tarazkp being just one example.
Why should I look for Mid tier content on hive when I can search Top tier content on Youtube/reddit ?
On Hive I spend more time searching for content, than getting entertained by content
When you reward content on YouTube (with your eyeballs) you get zero ROI in a financial sense. When you reward content creators on HIVE with a vote, you get a ROI on that vote.
Some people can min max money, but time has value as well. I disagree about zero ROI from YT/etc, free art tutorials technically had positive impact on my financials in the long run, it's not all black and white.
Maybe it is your personal preference for what is entertaining.
For example, I use YouTube almost exclusively for troubleshooting - not for entertainment at all - unless someone sends me links to YouTube content. I don't get how people can go through clip after clip of random shit there and consider the time well spent - but that is my preference.
Hive has real people I can interact with and get to know, share a joke and built enduring relationships with - this is far more entertaining for me.
I understand this a lot- I still check other social media because I can learn a lot. However from art point of view- content has been improving drastically especially because of consistent curations. Plus I learned about NFT-s which I've never heard of before a few weeks ago.
Maybe we need a new post trend- what communities we'd like to see in the future or what communities/tags we follow on other social media. I follow a lot of stuff I don't participate in but really enjoy seeing (urbex for example and I discovered there is a community for that on hive).
How do you think we might improve content discovery? What tools do you think would suit you?
The good thing is that HIVE blockchain is more than just a social media platform, but we seriously should change how the stake and upvotes work. Right now it makes sense to post low-tier content just for the sake of posting because that's where the HIVE rewards are.
@therealwolf had some great ideas.
Agreed, I'm looking for articles to teach me something new to help enrich my life. That's why social media can be a benefit. To share pertinent info with each other to take back control of ourselves.
I'm finding little of this here. Seeing crap recipes, make-up tutorials, recycled news stories and selfies hitting the trending page too often has caused me to spend less time here...
I love responses like these. They give me a good reason to comment.
There are a ton of great curation trails you can follow or curators you can delegate to who will return your portion of the rewards....oh wait it's not about that, you want to maximize rewards amIright?
Minimum of 1 vote per day instead of 10 would significantly help bootstrap attracting good content.
10x more valuable votes and less time wasted digging down the junkyard.
Many stakeholders, yourself included are already splitting their 10 votes to receive higher ROI. Who would use 1 vote, possibly sacrificing a lot of rewards and over-reward and risk ending up getting downvoted and miss out on more? Unless it's a self-vote or a sold vote it doesn't make much sense, at the same time it wouldn't be great for distribution.
Genuine people who are not here only for the money.
Hive tokens need to distribute value to the world so people want to leverage what they do best to buy said token.
Content discovery via use of the staked token should be the main objective.
We have to make such a tool - it's like an oracle - then we will know who is not worthy of our voice.
Something like "Voting CSI" in SteemWorld is already better than nothing ... even if not perfect.
this data should be on the post page, next to the user's nickname.
I've written a post about this once and I agree, people's voting "circle chart" should be easily accessible on their profile page.
Heartbreaking when you try your best every day with quality content and you crawl along, especially while others fly past you on arranged systems.
Reminds me so much about the happenings in the past.
An important post and warning to avoid our platform to get filthy...worth for a rehive...
You know there will always people out there playing the system and just trying to get rich while the poor ones stay here in the bottom hopping for scraps ehehe LOL
People seem to have forgotten very quickly how bad it was with the bid bots.
I feel like we hyper focus on these things. Just me though.
I agree the upvotes should be about how good the work is and the blogs. What they decided to give out. I would just hate for others to not be seen on hive that has good talent to show people. That's why I go on recent when I look for blogs
Noticed it lately? When hasn't it been a thing. It's a huge reason retention is not very good here and the trending page is static...
Yup vote trading went out of fashion with bid bots.
When people feel entitled to getting votes because of buying or trading or whatever they call their scheme, they can be downvoted back to reality. They often whine about it though, or fight back.
The problem is this is like 10% (conservative estimate) of the votes on the platform.
If people of the hive can create a single whale downvoting account by delegating small HP (1 million people= 1million hp) whose account's job is to downvote only these schemers. It should not upvote anyone to avoid retaliation. Just my thought. 😀
Not yet seen this but not surprising case, I think we're lacking a cap, a maximum voting value of one account on a post.
In our case, if the cap was at 1 HIVE of maximum voting value of an account on a post it would force it to vote about 50 posts per day instead of 10 and would encourage a better distribution and more curation or to encourage them to delegate more to curation teams such as @curie (for me is the best and most complete by its internationalization) or yours or others. The other advantage is also to solve the problem of suspicion of favoritism of some upvotes.
Of course this is also valid for the downvote, if we want a democracy then every action risking strong repercussions must be the work of the greatest number and not of one.
My proposal is certainly not perfect either, but by combining a certain number of rules suggested by everyone at some point we will find the alchemy that will finally solve all these problems, at least I hope so 🤣
Witness FR - Gen X - Geek 🤓 Gamer 🎮 traveler ⛩️
But would curie and other curation accounts be exempt from that same cap? This would likely just lead to creation of fake curation accounts. On the other hand if curie is also capped, they'd need to curate 5-10x more content, curators have limited time so it's impractical.
Hi @kristyglas, thanks for your feedback 👍
I don't think it's a big problem for them, already splitting their votes and having as @curie a significant team of curators (1 per country/language) and I think it's same for @acidyo with @ocd curation.
Rather, I think that the curation teams should have a specific account (ex: Cura-12345) like the community owner accounts (Hive-12345) on which a compensation system could be set up to reward their investment for the HIVE community. For my part I think that this system should be integrated directly into the core of HIVE.
This makes it possible to create a micro-economy around curation and to reward at their fair value all the actors in the curation process. For my part they have as much merit as a witness if not more (and I am a witness!). As for the compensation, I think it can perhaps come from the SPS (proposal fund system).
Witness FR - Gen X - Geek 🤓 Gamer 🎮 traveler ⛩️
Right now I better upvote more posts with less than 100 percent, rather than couple posts with 100. So that I could support more authors