RE: Steemit Winter Update: 2017 reflection, our Vision Statement and Mission, and a look forward
this is all off the top of my head.
remove voting or at least remove self voting over a certain level. either way this needs to be seriously overahuled.
users get to decide which 'party' or 'community' they can join. they don't have to but make it so they have positive incentives to do so, specifically incentives to contribute quality and not spammy shit posts.
content is generated under specific types. Types are tags. Communities or parties oversee these tags and moderate them
all communities can elect/recall mods /editors/etc
people can invest a stake in communities / delegate power to mods. the success of the party/community can get a percentage of investment return
content can be rated (valued) by an algorithm and not just a clickable and abusable vote system. possible variables include:
-number of views that reach the end of the post
-number of clicks on the post
-number of comments
-number of author replies
-number of 'stakes' in the article. 'stakes' are limited (X#/day and their value depends on user level. basically a reduced voting system)poor quality content has to effectively compete within the ecosystem of a party/community. No more trash posts on trending with 7th grade writing levels.
users of a certain level can report posts to mods based on certain criteria. "poor quality" should be one.
"poor quality" should be when the content of the article and the reward have no logical correlation. this sounds like it could be abused, but i really don't think so. it's obvious when an article is dumb, or has bad writing (probably most obvious for 'story' and 'fiction') yet the upvotes are there solely because of a mafia/brigade/vote-ring.
communities can debate a mod decision. ensure that there is democratic potential to veto. this would require active participation from people, and that I admit is unlikely since 90% of the user base I see on this site are sycophants and shills.
Those are a lot of issues, and some can't be solved by non-coders. The problem is prioritization. Instead of solving problems, they're developing features aimed at entrepreneurs (money) instead of improving the existing product.
1 Can’t be effectively done. Users will just create sock puppet to continue upvoting themselves.
2-4 basically what is planned for communities.
5 basically what is planned for SMTs
6 these are easily gameable. Please read the whitepaper.
7 this is a want, not a proposal. There is no proposal to actually accomplish this
8 also part of communities
9 I don’t understand what you mean
10 or they can leave and join a different community
Thanks for the engaging.
I’m hopeful that communities will help promote some kind real competition for what counts as ‘quality’ content. I’m deeply critical of monetizing social media, but still think there’s a lot of potential in this project.
Again, real competition, I think, will solve a lot of issues and I think communities can promote that competition.