The Value of the Steemstem Community

in #stemstem7 years ago (edited)

For emphasis and clarification on these numbers. There are users whom trail steemstem without getting curated and they are not included in looking at the voting power of steemstem. This also does not include curie or any votes that trail curie. There is more SP involved than is shown, but for simplicity I will stick to the community.


Now it is difficult to put a value on human interaction but right now I will do something close. You see, since January 14th there have been around 518 unique authors that received both a steemstem vote and a curie vote so what I did was calculated the SP of all of those people, the SP delegated to those people, and the SP they delegated away and added it all up to find the Steem Power of the group. Now I could put a dollar value on that but instead I am going to go 1 step further, I am going to tell you how much a vote (at 100% VP with 100% VW) is worth from that crowd.

<< That is literally the source code used to pull the steem power of everyone. The output was:

Steem Power: 344606.4109854344
Recieved Delegation: 108652.34694091167
Delegations Given: 44488.834299517715
Total SP: 408769.92362682836

Now we can really just round that to 408769.924 Steem Power. This being said, Vests are better to use to calculate the value of a vote, but most people are more familiar with steem power so there you go. Collectively the 518 authors voted o by both steemstem and curie in that time have almost half a million SP with a 100% vote of around $65.68 and that is without including steemstem, curie, the steemstem management and curation team, or those whom follow the steemstem trail without getting voted on. The point is that just the authors that aren't on the team can make a huge difference on the value of a post... But if we include steemstem team members (and steemstem account) we raise that SP count from 408,769.924 to 585,662.481 SP and raise the value of a vote to around $94.03 (without curie or other trailing votes)

Edit:

Just to clarify, the steemstem team members and steemstem account had only around 180,000 SP, and 400,000+180,000 = 580,000. I am not saying 580,000 was held by the 19 team members + steemstem.


Why I wrote this was to show that if we were more of a community then we could support eachother way way better than we are currently doing. An average, decent, steemstem post gets what? 50-100 votes and of which, many are simply trailing the account. I am not asking you to all go and upvote every steemstem post to 100% (your voting power would become more extinct than the dinosaurs and likely your bandwidth too) but you can try more. This post, by the way, is not meant to be about the money. Instead its supposed to show that we have potential as a community that we simply are not reaching that we could be, and this is just an easy example to point that out. Anyways for more information on why this was written read here and the comments... You will get the point.

Users that were monitored for this (in no particular order):

@lemouth @mobbs @kryzsec @steemstem-bot @anarchyhasnogods @trumpman @ruthgirl @steemstem @justtryme90 @zest @alexs1320 @kingswisdom @guga34 @aboutcoolscience @iamphysical @carloserp-2000 @greenrun @gentleshaid @aamin @abigail-dantes @adetola @aditili @afifa @agbona @ajkapss @ajpacheco1610 @akeelsingh @alekau @alex.frouge @alexaivytorres @alexander.alexis @alexbeyman @alexdory @alexzeigt @alien.nation @alpharay @altherion @amavi @ameet77804 @amity123 @andyblack @anevolvedmonkey @angelggomz @angelinaa @angelojcg @anibalmdz @anna.urbanska @annieben @anyes2013 @ari16 @arrjey @asaj @asbonclz @asmr-austria @atheneav @autinf @aximot @azabache900 @azman @azulear @bala41288 @bape682 @bardionson @barton26 @bendelgreco @benedicta @bikkichhantyal @binarymark @biomanu @bitfairy @biw @blessing97 @braide @branbello @brewingstories @callumogilvy @calmabryan27ree @carlaro @carlgbush @casweeney @chandy18 @charlescarter @cheider @chidiebere @chloroform @chotho @christinaa @churchboy @cisah @clausewitz @clode @co-co @commierad @corsica @count-antonio @cpufronz @craftamap @crazy-daisy @cristi @cryptoitaly @cryptowani @csusbgeochem1 @cuarzo05 @daedevils @damzxyno @dandymee @darkiche @dave76 @davizoe @daylen @dber @dedicatedguy @deepculture @deepresearch @deholt @deliniz @dennis.bacchus @derbesserwisser @destrudo @deusjudo @dexterdev @djredimi2 @dkmathstats @docbrowns @docteur-plantes @doctorcro @donaldpete @donfelix @donkeykong9000 @doucedou @dpyroc @drifter1 @drkomoo @drookyn @dysfunctional @earisu @economicus @effofex @egotheist @ejrangel @electronv @elenamolisso @eleonardo @eleyda78 @eliaschess333 @elith @elyvelasquezleon @ememovic @emiliomoron @emily61 @emmaculate @engineer.jocs @engrkomoo @enzor @epictus @erh.germany @ertwro @etcmike @ethandsmith @eugin @eurogee @exercisinghealth @eyedeology @fancybrothers @farmacistasmz @fcot @fejiro @filotasriza3 @fitdoc @florae @flurgx @fona @fragmentarion @francisaponte25 @frankjavier @freddbrito @fredrikaa @freyablekman @fromhell2sky @futurethinking @futurmen @galotta @geniusvillain @gerardoalfred @gexi @gianluccio @giornalista @giovaabbatichio @giu-marcantuono @gmaktub @gokhan83kurt @gotgame @gra @grandpere @gregan @greylml @grider123 @grottbags @gtan @habracho @hadji @halloworld @happy.food.life @hboi @hellofuture @henrychidiebere @herverisson @heutegelernt @hidden84 @highonthehog @himal @hjashnsaz @hogarcosmico @holothewise @horpey @humanduck @iamshaly @iamthegray @iamunframed @ideas-abstractas @ilbirraiooo @iliasdiamantis @illuminatus @imaginedragon @infinitelearning @irime @irza @isacastillor @issavets @ixindamix @jackelinlopez @jajdgenius @jakedriftwood @jakipatryk @jamhuery @jamiba @javehimself @jaydurella @jc21.ramos @jeannerossini @jeebee0331 @jefpatat @jennifer.jimenez @jepper @jhairahdignos @jlmol7 @johan794 @johelconh @jonelq @jorge150785 @josalarcon2 @joseferrer @joseg @joseleogon @josevbc @josue783 @jozefkrichards @jringo @jsxchemistry @juanadearco @juanjdiaz89 @juecoree @justyy @jutdagut @kaiyoko @kansuze @katerinaramm @kaydee @kedi @keephy @kenadis @kerriknox @kharrazi @knfitaly @komichian @ksolymosi @kyriacos @lamexicana @langford @latm @lauch3d @laylahsophia @learnandteach01 @leczy @lefactuoscope @lennstar @lesshorrible @lets-tech @lianaakobian @lisbethferrer @logic42 @lordkingpotato @lordneroo @lorenzor @louic @louielowa @louisbettong @loular @loveisintheair @lucastar @maikelsoto @mar.milano @marglys @mariaentela @markos86 @marvel1206 @marverick984 @marynes5 @masterwriter @masterwu @mathowl @maurelvys @mayowadavid @mayrie28 @mcw @mdosev @megasuperextra @meghana123 @mes @mhizkemmie @migueldavidor @mihaitecnology @mike11 @mikekenlytungal @mirkon86 @mittymartz @mlaura @monomyth @mountain.phil28 @mountainwashere @mrbreeziewrites @mrs.nobody @munawar1235 @muphy @mystifact @natachayacinthe1 @nathan290595 @naturicia @nawamy @nedspeaks @neyi24 @ngans @nicotinamina @nikoleondas @nitesh9 @noble-noah @noirac @nonationnoborder @numbo @o1o1o1o @obliviousowl @obvious @odiaprecious @oendertuerk @official-hord @ogochukwu @okunlolayk @olayiwola @ollitheone @oluwabori @oluwoleolaide @omonosa @omstavan @oscarcc89 @osita21 @osmerj @osmy07 @otsouvalas @pacheco05 @pangoli @pario @pearlumie @phillyhistory @physics-o-mania @physics.benjamin @pikkio82 @pisolutionsmru @plotbot2015 @polaleye50 @ponmile @pratik27 @preciousdave @privacybydesign @procrastilearner @prometheus21 @proteus-h @punjolife @rabamaker @rabo @reconnectnature @redqueen7 @reviewit @rharphelle @rickie @rickyxp @rilc0n @rionpistorius @rnunez09 @robertjsmc @robertoromero @robotics101 @rocking-dave @rossanavictora @rsc227 @rscalabrini @rt395 @rubies @rudee @rupamxanu @saho @sakura1012 @salihuhassan @sammielaboi @samminator @sammyutd @samve @sanji @sarabelardo @sarrie @sary @saulrico @saunter @sc-steemit @scalextrix @schay @scienceangel @sciencegeek @scipio @scisteem @sco @security101 @sergejkarkarov @sese317j @setapart @sheglow @shodiya @simplifylife @sinbad989 @singhbinod08 @siniy @sissyjill @sistem @smashedturtle @smurfette @snackaholic @sociopathe @soleil-research @sooflauschig @spaghettiscience @sparklez @spederson @st3llar @stabilowl @stanleyc-md @stats-n-lats @stayoutoftherz @steemitseed @steempsych @steepup @stefanofiori @stevendion @storytales @sustainablyyours @svemirac @sward @sweetestglo-eu @taborda-charrouf @tanyaschutte @tarazkp @targodan @techblogger @techlife @techmojo @technocracy @tensor @terrylovejoy @teutonium @tfcoates @thaealmarza @thatsweeneyguy @the-geekiest-one @the.chiomz @theaustrianguy @thedrewtrott @theinsideout @thelonelydev @thequantumknight @therockman @thestronics @thethinkingdr @thinkingmind @three-d @tkappa @tking77798 @tngflx @tolustx @tomastonyperez @top5attractions @treslotos @tsoldovieri @turpsy @uchefrancis @ugonma @underpants @universe.laws @unus-zerum @urost @uzochukwu @valchiz @valth @vannour @viannis @vinamra @vjap55 @voghera @warrensz @whalhesa @whentone @whileponderin @whitewarlike @wilians @wisdomdavid @woleybabz @xandra79 @xaydtrips @xtrex @ydavgonzalez @yoes @youngky @ysabelbencomo @zmijavci @zoneboy @zonguin @zouxx @zuni

Sort:  
Loading...

I have been thinking along these lines but had not your analytical ability. Engagement would make the community better and reduce the work that curators have to do. It would also reduce complaints because good posts would receive upvotes and engagement whether or not the curators find them. The steemstem VP would not be under so much pressure.

I have tried to follow the posts of most members but the community is so large that I cannot follow everyone. But if each of us can follow as many posts as possible and engage, then even though we may not achieve 100% of what we desire, at least we would have something meaningful done. The biggest obstacle to achieving the engagement goal, in my opinion, is that most of our members may not really be STEM people. In other words, they write STEM because they are fairly certain that their post would be curated. So, how can they engage in contents they are not really interested in? Sad.

However, I am sure that if we keep thinking about it, we should be able to figure out something that works. Thanks for taking the time to do this analysis: it makes everything more obvious.

I don't think anyone needs to follow everyone. I mean we have multiple curators (along with curators for different sub communities) that spreads the work out specifically so that each curator doesn't need to follow and read every single post, and we don't expect the community to either.

Personally what I would like to see is a post that is decent, that leads into though provoking items, that has a lot of potential to get some comments on it, maybe even get resteemed a couple of times. Like there is no reason why someone can write a good post and get 12 comments, of which 8 are spam.

As for how they can engage with content they aren't interested in, first if they aren't into STEM and are just writing it for the money then they are in the wrong business. I mean DMania will upvote anything meme related (spam included) and they could easily steal 10-15 memes and post them earning $150 a day and have it take less than 10 minutes. However on the flip side is that STEM spans a lot of subjects from aspects of video games to mechanics to, well, just a lot. Trumpman wrote a series (I will call it that) on the phallic members (penises) of animals and that isn't even the strangest thing curated. STEM is more than just textbook science from PhD candidates and I personally think you would be hardpressed to find someone not interested in STEM at all. If they do have absolutely no interest in the topics but want to find a community that is engaging then they can always hang around in the general chat and maybe to collaboration posts with other members on non-stem related items. That, believe it or not, is still community engagement. And I mean from my views of our general room, quite often it has non-STEM items going on.

I don't want to pretend like I have all of the answers, I don't. Maybe you cold think of way more things that I can't (I am human, I make mistakes sometimes, well, a lot) but that doesn't mean we can't try. So thank you for this comment, I promise my response is not purely argumentative (I actually don't mean to argue, I really liked your comment).

Thank you for your response. It really explained in clear terms how we may begin to engage better. I have learned at least one thing from what you wrote. I did not know that DMania could upvote memes. If that is so, then those trying to fit into STEM without having much interests in STEM topics are really in the wrong business.

Somehow, for me, my engagement has improved since steemSTEM went on break. This is probably shooting myself in the foot but I suspect that this improved engagement was born out of the need to have fun now that I don't have to expect steemstem curation. Another reason would be the fact that most people who would upvote my content now that steemstem is on break are community members so I better engage them on their posts, right?

How we can replicate this level of engagement if steemstem does come back is unclear to me but I really feel that engagement of the community has improved since the break.

I really appreciate your comment and no, it wasn't argumentative. If you agree to everything I say, then we would have no communication. The more predictable a communication signal is, the less information it carries.

Somehow, for me, my engagement has improved since steemSTEM went on break.

I think us going on a break and everything that happened (publicly) is getting a lot of the community members to realize the very real potential of steemstem disappearing and if preventing such a thing from happening is to engage more than people will have no problems doing that. I mean just for a metric lets look at the number of comments on the past few steemstem posts:

I mean it went from 19, 51, 36 to suddenly over 200. I mean we really aren't expecting 200+ comments on every post but like that shows that we are effecting the community. So I think, in regards to your question of:

How we can replicate this level of engagement if steemstem does come back is unclear

can be answered with we may not have to but we will see in the future when it presents itself.

I truly appreciate your comment (both original and this one) as it shows engagement of and beyond what most get. While I agree that disagreement, when polite, can bring forth communication but I also think that we could find communications out of agreement. Anyways, thank you for commenting.

Yes, quality discourse does not have to be argumentative. Thank you for always replying back. I hope the community members see the benefits of engagement for what it is worth and no go back to our old ways. All the best.

Engagement, again. This is what we need.With a community acting as a community, things can be changed :)

Thing is, a community needs an identity and just writing under @steemSTEM doesn't mean you're actually part of the pack.

Someone mentioned adding "sub-tags" for steemSTEM posts like @steemstemengineering (as an example). Within these tags it would be possible to create sub-communities that engage with eachother's work. I know there are some problems with implementing sub-tags but just a suggestion as to how we could get people involved in their respective fields. SteemSTEM in general is, in my opinion, too broad to have 100% involvement on all levels.

100% engagement was never expected. However we have almost no engagement and that is the problem.

Honestly, I didn't realize it was that bad. I was under the impression that there was a lot more involvement and feedback on STEM posts from fellow members.

Some posts do but then I mean a lot of posts you can look at and around 60%-80% (sometimes 100%) of the replies are spam and since the number of spam comments on any post averages to around 4-10 (author depending) it shows that there isn't enough engagement.

What I would like to see is 2-3 real comments (at least) for every spam comment on the good posts and for the posts that need more work and aren't quite there to get at least 1-2 real comments for every spam comment, even if the real comments are suggestions on what could be done better or something. I mean its a two sided coin as well because authors need to also try to find ways to actively encourage engagement but that encouraging engagement means nothing is only 4 people actually read the post with 1 of them being the author, 2 of them being curators and the 4th being some random kid going through steemit to see why the post got voted to $40 and how they could get those votes.

true. We have to:

  • find ways to reward engagement, as it's obviously not working to the necessary extent with our current system
  • get people to join the curation trail in large numbers, as you can't expect the crowd to curate the steemstem-tag with all it's spam. We have to make clear that we are curating for them, but we need their votes.

I am going to decrease the number of people I am following and focus on steemstem content creators. That way it will be easier for me personally to filter spam from good content. This is something we all could do.
A problem I see with subtags is that we will have tags that are very small (like #de-stem) and some that will be huge (like health). Cheers!

I am very optimistic about the outcome of the break. A lot of us steeemstem members have decided to come all out and support the community and its got all the positive vibes around.

Just like someone said, "we are the community"

I am glad to hear the community is coming together, I just hope it is sustained.

Well analysed.
This also boils down to engagement. And this is exactly what we need to do.
I'm part of the trail. But that wouldn't stop me from voting 100% manually to people too. It may not be worth much, but
"Little + little = much"

I think that is something to show from this post is that the little bits from everyone in the community can add up to a lot.

I'll get this message across by resteem. I definitely love what you guys doing. I do feel like a jerk when I requested for review.. I thought you guys are getting paid too. From now on, I'll contribute more of my votes to steemstem. I really want to see a scientific community strive. I'm tired of looking at whales fight, stupid memes and other irrelevant articles.

We get some of the payouts from the steemstem distilled payouts/curie curation rewards along with the payouts from steemstem-bot but it doesn't make up for the value of a curie vote. It is, by definition, volunteer work.

We definitely need to work better as a community. I didn't realize how neglecting I was by staying to only certain subjects and authors. I'm definitely going to do better and plan on delegating sp to steemstem once I get more sp. Using all of my rewards to power up.

Personally I think it would be better for you to keep your SP and follow the trail or something. We do want you guys to grow and earn steempower, like if everyone powered up all of their rewards (from the numbers I am getting from Lemouth) then it wouldn't take long for the number (that 408,000.000 SP) to double and give or community way more, we just don't want the only goal to be for users to think this is a paycheck and as soon as they get a payout to 100% powerdown.

I mean if everyone followed steemstem at say 20%-80% then they would still always have SP to vote with along with being able to help out community members. But again it isn't all about voting either, there are so many ways for people to engage (voting, commenting, helping people out, giving tips/hints, making content together, etc) and when very little is done in the long. And yo by no means have to comment on every subject either, stick to the subjects you know like there is no reason someone with a background in biology should force themselves to comment on a post about the quantum nature of dark matter but that also doesn't mean that the biology person shouldn't interact with other biology posts, if they can.

Like a perfect example is maybe a post was written well but some of the information in one part was iffy, you know it was a little confusing with how it was written or maybe they wrote a leading hypothesis as a fact. Another person with experience in biology could come and comment something like "Hey I noticed you wrote [enter blockquote of something they wrote] and I was wondering if you could expand on it a little. It was a little confusing how yo wrote it." or for the second part "I think it could be better phrased this way."

Maybe the person is a new user and they don't know how to format a post so someone could come along and tell them some formatting tips. Like there is so much that could be done, in my opinion

Every little step matters :)

I feel your dedication. Together we can do better. Thank you.

I feel that you know just as well as I do the feeling when you read a really good post and see it get almost no interaction.

I know the feeling, it's something we've all experienced at a particular point in our journey here.

Good post thanks. I will join the trail.

We will move forward together and much stronger. I am ready to do my part to achieve this. Lets have fun.

I hope we do have fun.