Please take steps to rid the platform of corruption.
It is with great sadness that I have to say that there is a lot of corruption going on on the Steemit platform. What kind of corruption?
Answer: Curators are constantly involved in corruption. The Steemit team may be evaluating them without any review. A look at the weekly reports in the Steem POD community reveals a tide of corruption. If you search each report here, you will see that 5/6 of the 7 people selected in each report are curators from other teams. It's very frustrating that a curator is only interested in selecting another curator's posts because they select each other's posts. Reviewing those links provides examples of give and take.
Number 1
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 posts |
| Other curators | 5 post |
Number 2
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 4 post |
Number 3
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 4 post |
Number 4
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 1 post |
Number 5
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 4 post |
Number 6
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 4 post |
Number 7
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 0 post |
Number 8
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 0 post |
Number 9
| Banner Missing SC08 Team | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 4 post |
Number 10
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 3 post |
Number 11
 | link |
|---|---|
| Select | 7 post |
| Other Curator | 1 post |
Similar abuses of power are happening every week, as per the information mentioned. I would request @steemitblog to make a rule so that curators select unique posts across the platform instead of selecting each other curator's posts. As a result of give and take, many quality posts are not being evaluated. I would be very happy if I could see transparency among curators. Very disappointed to see such irregularities on this platform of love. I hope the steemit team will continue to take good steps.
Humble request ; @steemcurator01 @steemcurator02 @rme @pennsif
End
A well-wisher of the steemit platform
The issue raised in your blog is truly important and thought-provoking. Through data and examples, you have attempted to highlight what appears to be a pattern of mutual favoritism among some curators, which raises concerns about transparency and fairness on the platform. The statistics you presented from consecutive reports make the matter worthy of serious consideration.
However, I believe that allegations of this nature should be evaluated through impartial investigation and clear evidence so that the actual situation can be properly understood. Constructive criticism and calls for greater transparency are essential for maintaining a healthy and sustainable environment on Steemit.
I appreciate your effort in bringing attention to this matter and encouraging discussion within the community. I hope the Steemit team will carefully review the concerns raised and continue working toward a more transparent, fair, and inclusive curation system for all users.
I want the irregularities to stop. Curators should evaluate posts from other regular users. But I am very disappointed that curators are mostly evaluating other curators' posts. I hope there will be new steps for this.
No notifications were sent to the people I mentioned in my post. How will they find my post? Please help me. It is important to reach these issues to the Steemit team.
When selecting posts for the Learning Challenge, some teams appear to give preference to their own members. In some cases, scores are even changed later by editing comments, raising concerns about fairness and transparency. If such practices are taking place, they should be investigated and addressed openly. The STEEM community deserves a fair, transparent, and accountable evaluation process.
I will ask @steemitblog to investigate this matter.
I appreciate your efforts.
I understand your concern, and transparency in curation is definitely important for trust on the platform.
At the same time, curation teams often work within guidelines that may not always be visible to users, so what looks like “repeat selection” can sometimes be part of internal evaluation systems or overlapping quality standards rather than direct bias.
That said, your point highlights something valuable — the need for continued improvement in fairness, diversity of selections, and clearer visibility of how curators make decisions.
Hopefully the Steemit team can review feedback like this and keep refining the system so that more unique and deserving posts across all communities get recognized consistently.
Constructive discussions like this are important for platform growth.
I want @steemitblog like you to try to understand this issue. Thank you