RE: What If Everybody Did That? A New Standard for Delegation Bots
I liked the philosophy of the question “What if everybody did that?”, it really helps to look at things from a different side and opens your eyes to the perspective of actions.
I still have internal disagreements about the question of how to determine the usefulness of content on Steemit. What do curators base their decisions on? Sometimes I try to read articles “about nothing” that receive a high rating from curator_01, and this puts me into some kind of dead end. And my feeling of dead end becomes stronger because of the difficulty of understanding the author’s train of thought, even though the article is written in my native language. Maybe my way of expressing thoughts sometimes looks like artificially generated content (LOL!), this is one of my theories. But as I understand it, the Thoth bot evaluates or should evaluate the informational value of the article.
I am ready to note that delegating SP to communities or bots motivates participants to write more, but the quality simply goes down. I notice how some participants directly write as it is: “I have nothing to write about, but now I have reached the required number of words for the post.” And exactly the situation that you write about is forming. Exactly what will lead to collapse if “everybody does that”.
Before, I tried to make an emphasis on quality, I wrote rarely but about something more important than stories about how the day went. But the possibility to delegate SP looks tempting, and gradually my greed defeated that other quality in me which held me back from keeping a “diary” about boring routine and just taking it by the number of words.
I don’t know if it is worth taking my words seriously. Probably these are just thoughts out loud :)
I do, too. That's why I try to avoid the phrase "quality content". To me, the content that should be incentivized is the content that draws eyeballs - so I usually refer to "attractive content" - i.e. it attracts an audience. I know from other social media platforms "attractive content" isn't always "quality content", though it's nice when the two are aligned.
However, it's not easy to define what "attractive content" really looks like. In my own mind, one of the things I look for is "surprise", which is consistent with this:
I also try to look for relevance and evidence of higher order thinking: not just parroting from one source, but combining information from multiple sources and drawing conclusions from it.
You can see the prompts that ship with Thoth, here and here. I've tailored it a little bit in my own environment, but that's basically still what I'm using.
When I created the LLM integration, I included the ability for each person who runs the bot to replace those prompts if they have different ideas about what sort of content should be supported. The idea is that each person tailors it to their own preferences to build a combined, decentralized result that covers the full range of human diversity of thought.
0.00 SBD,
0.79 STEEM,
0.79 SP
Thank you for the reply. Now I clearly have something to think about :)
0.00 SBD,
0.00 STEEM,
0.32 SP