RE: Proof of no brain

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Proof of no brain

in steem •  6 years ago  (edited)

Oh certainly the platform has issues and some of that is related to how the power hierarchy of this website works and finding solutions should be an aim, but I hardly think taking away artist rewards is a good solution. I'd say taking away artist rewards is not even a good enough solution to be called a shitty solution.

Also I do "read something, like it, reward it". I do more content creation than rewarding but I do both, and comment on people's things too, just like I would make posts on reddit etc or videos on youtube but also support / upvote / share / comment on other people's posts on those websites. I also would be buying stuff from other Redbubble and Threadless artists if I had the money to regularly do that. I intend to buy something soon. I do exactly what you said. I don't upvote things I don't like. I might upvote things I disagree with if they encourage discussion and I believe having that discussion is a net positive, but not stuff I don't like.

"Everybody thinks the same way" - I can tell you now that is definitely not true. Many people do not think the same way as me, as I've learned over the course of this year, and the way I think has both pros and cons. I do not think the same way as the average person.

"most artists steal" - I would not say most do. Some do, yes, and it is more prevalent in certain platforms and within Steemit it seems to be more prevalent in some tags than others. But not all artists steal so taking artist rewards away over this point is horrible and is punishing everyone for the few that are doing the wrong thing, which is somethign that happens in life, but is really really shitty and we don't need that happening here as well. If I notice people have stolen content, I simply don't upvote it and I'd recommend others do the same.

"I starved myself to "eat" your posts" - Pretty sure that's not how consuming content works? If it was, Jacksepticeye, Netflix and Matt Shea owe me a lot of money then. I didn't actually say curators shouldn't get rewards, just that it definitely shouldn't be a case of artists getting nothing and curators only getting rewards. Netflix has Bojack Horseman, the best show ever made, on it. The logic of taking away artist rewards would mean I should earn money for praising Bojack Horseman and the people who actually made that great show should get nothing. That's dumb.

"I liked seeing people personally play a hand, talking to each other rather than being on a feed from their facebook or whatever, I liked the active audience and participatory manner in which the place functioned before" - Yeah I like discussing stuff on here too. I do share videos etc from other platforms I'm on but discussion on those from people who saw them here tends to stay here. I also make content directly for Steemit. One of the other things I liked about Steemit was the fact that it is socially similar to reddit (other than the big difference in self promo) and Reddit is pretty much the best other social media socially (and facebook is the worst). It is pretty decent socially when you talk to people who aren't just trying to get upvotes in exchange for upvotes etc.

I completely agree that value should come from appreciation - reading something, liking it or at least thinking it is a net positive discussion etc, and rewarding it - I 100% agree with that and that's how I have always used this platform. However, artists can't get any value from people appreciating their posts if artist rewards don't exist, and I'd rather make money from my art than be on a platform where the only way you can make money is to curate other people's art. Both parts I'd say are essential and I couldn't support dropping either side, and I can't support paying curators more than artists either. I can't not make my art so if there were no artist rewards, I'd be on a website that did reward artists. I'm already on multiple platforms as it is, and steemit wasn't my first, but it is one that rewards artists and I hope to find solutions to issues on here, but I hardly see that devaluing artists and taking away artist rewards in favour of curation rewards only is any type of real solution.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I never argued for taking artist rewards, I'm making a point that curation is content creation as well, curation in general is a fundamental piece that is broken and nobody does it, sorry, all people do it, but they don't have that much stake.

It's hard and underappreciated, so it's automated, so bidbots do it, thank god I'm out, :D I remember now this took a long time, it's tedious to read, I got lucky I know English and had free time to be here to be able to understand a minute of it.

Technically it's evolving, but I can say things were better before the bid-bots, everything you got was earned, not bought.

Things are cheap and yeah this eco-system is broken, everybody's been hoping things will change and they have, I'm not sure it's been for the better, it's a weird mix for me, it's not really a social media nor a market, having more "good people" is good in a social sense but if the economics are broken it doesn't work so well, it's been a interesting experience, I can't really blame anyone, I don't think it's going to go out of business, at least for a few years :D it might be sad, at least I think it is in a sense, curation and content is what this platform is "selling", the users are exchanging that plus the token and you have an economy, that never worked like that since the token needed to be mined and the inflation inflated, so it's not going to work like that in the future, now that I think about it, proof of brain is relatively new, it's never been implemented, it's a proof of stake, social media :|

That statement now sounds gloomy,

everybody thinks the same way and uses the same basic framework of mind

I was joking, but we mostly use our preferred language, like our comfort zone, when something new comes along and becomes the norm everybody does it without question.

Still steem has been a nice place and interesting to see, I still have high hopes, but I'm reluctant to spend time and that's all I can offer this place.

But enough about that, it's the holidays, Merry Christmas

Fair enough.

However I was replying to a comment thread that said:

"What would be the necessary change in your opinion? Removing author rewards?"

    "That seems like a very interesting idea"

I do see value in curation because without curation, good content is less likely to be rewarded, and it will be harder to find good content, and I'm sure we all would prefer to see good content than bad content. Ofc good is subjective but I guess at the very least I mean I'd rather see original content than stolen content. One of the areas I like to create within is animation, and I'd like to see more original animations on here by other people, but stolen content is an issue in the animation tag where there's just a lot of stuff that is clearly stolen (like actual TV shows) and it is hard to find the original content mixed in with all that. I think it's very valuable if someone can find that hidden gem within all the stolen stuff and I don't think curation is useless or shouldn't be rewarded.

What I didn't agree with was the idea of removing author rewards. To me the person finding that animation is very useful but so is the amazing person who made that animation (and animation is certainly not an easy or quick thing to do) and to me it does seem backwards to reward the person finding the animation in all the other stuff, but not the person who made said animation.

The thing is, without the person suggesting removing author rewards as a potentially necessary change, I wouldn't have made my first comment on this in the first place. I have no problem with curators getting the rewards they do now, or even 50/50 but I can't agree with rewarding the "finders" but not the "creators". A lot of work, love, time, blood, sweat and tears goes into creating things and I'd never think I should get rewarded for helping get someone's creation seen if the creator was getting nothing for it. I think both should be rewarded. And as I said in my original comment, I don't think curation is more valuable than creation. An individual curator might do a better job than an individual creator but as a whole, curation isn't more valuable than creation and we shouldn't make a change to where we reward curators only but not creators. The other comment set the precedent for one being more valuable than the other by suggesting removing author rewards.

I also think there are issues with the platform and it has some pros over other platforms. I don't know the platform will go over more time, but I'm hoping well instead of a crash and burn.

As for the thinking thing, fair enough that you were joking, but I honestly don't just do the norm without question. Perhaps my life would be easier if I did, but I don't. Idk maybe what you describe is the norm and the reason I'm not like that is because I'm not neurotypical but all I can say is my own experience and I don't "sheep" like what you describe. On here, I act the same way I did September 2017 when I joined. The amount I use Steemit jumps around due to varying interests and responsibilities but I didn't really change how I approached the platform in that time. And I do think through the things I do on here. Sometimes I impulsively do things, both on and off here, but the things I jump into rather than thinking hard about aren't necessarily things that are the norm and I do tend to think through things, especially things where I don't know the impact of doing that thing on the platform as a whole.

Merry Christmas.