"We need good content" But who defines what's good enough?

in timeforachange •  8 years ago 

I've seen hundreds of posts flashing by, some by new users, some by whales, all instructing others to write "Quality content" on Steemit.

No more circkle jerking, no more #introduceme, but good, solid, fresh contents. The problem here is who'll be the judge in this game, what are the rules, where are the sidelines, and what can be defined as "quality".

A good post is subject to the person reading it. I for example could read all day long about development, while someone else might hate that topic. Does this defines the quality of the post itself? Here's the truth of what defines a good, quality post that is likely to trend:

Anything a whale upvotes. We don't even care what whale. Any of them.

Our objective point of view is getting blurred by posting what we think whales will love. We tend to upvote what we think a whale might upvote. We monitor them, following their leads. Our objectiveness is gone.

The whales set the definition of a quality post, and the users adapt to it. If all the whales upvoted the introduceme tag, everyone started writing introduction posts. Now the whales are switching to a new tag, users will post accordingly.

The content of your post has little to do with the objective quality of it. Several tools to detect possible trending posts look at the number of lines, number of images used, author reputation and so on. Never will a tool or bot read your content. All these parameters are based on detailed charts about the posts our whales have upvoted.

In a way, we're all sheeps and we have some shepherds. It's our nature to follow the shepherds as a flock. It almost seems like the vast majority here is afraid to lose some of their voting power to a post that will likely never trend or pay some rewards. For the sake of this community's future i would like to make a statement:

The definition of a quality post is the one who reads it.

The outline of a good post is if you enjoyed it. The rules are that it must please you, as a reader. And in turn, the judges will be those who support you because they like to read your posts.

Don't be afraid to read the new section, even if it's a new user, or a poor written post without any images. Stop following the whales like a bunch of psychopaths monitoring their every move.

Be the judge in all objectiveness.

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:  

It's an interesting point of view: upvote herding, but just as the post typology you've mentioned (how do build quality content), this topic has been posted as well many times around.

The thing about whales is that they have started to diversify. For about 2 weeks now I started seeing more individualism develop among the whales, stronger than before (I think it was after @dollarvigilante joined - just to have a milestone).
This diversification I see could be happening from 2 reasons:

  1. Whales are more comfortable now and start curating manually (less upvote botlists) as the content is also diversified, the Steemit userbase is larger, more content to choose from.
  2. Wealth distribution. Whales simply distribute their upvotes in more directions than before. I see more <500$ posts on the trending page whereas we used to have a just a few and only >7-10k before.

Why is it still happening (upvote herding)?

  • Lots of new people think they will get a curation rewards off a post that has a high reward amount. Minnows will get nothing if a post is over a few hundreds..
  • The whales actually have good taste and upvote quality content that is highly appreciated by hundreds of others, like for real.

We're still small though growing rapidly, we're still in beta, though with less and less issues every week. Once we hit a few hundred thousands users (maybe even 1 mil.) this will no longer be the case as people (whales too) I think will focus on the specific area of their interest (like development in your case) and contribute there, looking for posts in their main tag interest areas only.

just as the post typology you've mentioned (how do build quality content), this topic has been posted as well many times around.

This post is rather a motivation to being an individual rather than following the herd.

Lovely comment, i agree with every word you say.

Yup, I got that totally. I was merely saying it's been discussed before too :D:D
Keep up the good work, I have been following your posts for a while now!

Thanks!

I somewhat agree with you, but this:

The whales actually have good taste and upvote quality content that is highly appreciated by hundreds of others, like for real.

What's this ?

The whales are ordinary people with their own biases, points of views, narrowed by their life experiences and areas of interest.

NOBODY can be a "good taste"/"quality content" judge. No even a writer, a psychologist, a marketing manager, content manager, creative, etc. Nobody.

You know why ? Because this is a platform without any theme. For an art gallery there are curators. For a science magazine there are scientists-editors, for a game there is a game designer.
Do you think Zuckerberg is the most qualified person for Facebook ? No. He has a team. But he has the decision (part of it). That's all. Has the decision.

So, whales are just people. With power. They are not better or worse than me/you. But they decide what's the future of Steemit. That's all.

I didn't want to be too aggressive but I disagree with that quote. I agree for 75 % with your statements.

Peace.

You're right, good taste is subjective and strictly relates to the individual expressing it. Used in the same context as Steemit quality content I think there is a line that can be drawn, from a majority point of view, to what is quality/non-quality without too much expertise behind the curtain :)
Upvote herding will happen on quality content. Again quality can be considered subjective, as you've pointed out above, but the majority of whales/users will pretty much have it in the same scope I think (content informative level, originality, catchy titles, good language control, formatting, visuals etc.).

PS. I always appreciate feedback @fishborne, never see it as aggressive unless..you know, it's aggressive (is aggressiveness subjective too? hahah).

No, no aggressivity here. Just exchanging opinions like adults. :)

Love the way @smooth is always upvoting a comment to say "i've read your post...." :D

yeah :D

well, I upvote only the stuff I like regardless of how many votes it has already - who is to say that my taste is bad just because my vote doesn't count for much? assuming every new person only upvotes because they want a payout is using faulty logic, and bestowing whales with all the magical attributes just because they are whales - too. they could have transferred a few bitcoins to their account and now have lots of power to throw around - does that mean they are better people with better taste?

Here's the truth of what defines a good, quality post that is likely to trend:
Anything a whale upvotes. We don't even care what whale. Any of them.

That is true right now... Imagine we had only one whale..It would be worse...
When steemit grows we will have eventually more whales , more dolphins, more minnows. It will be hard for a whale to dominate the trending page anymore! It's now also difficult since whales have separate opinions,personalities,ideas etc... If we have 1000 dolphins it will not matter anymore what the whales want! As contribution of steems continues decentralization will be a reality very soon and the steem will be way more "democratic"...

Hi steve-walschot, the Robin Hood Whale initiave has opened a new channel robinhood-links

ONLY post other people's work (Please check if the author has already been featured in the pinned spreedsheet) - These are posts to be considered by curators of the Robin Hood Whale initiative.

For more info on The Robin Hood Whale initiave join robinhood on steemit.chat.

Hopefully in time, people start voting on things they like and not what they think others will like. If everyone votes on what they think others will like, nobody is actually rewarding the content they themselves want. Not even the whales.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

There does seem to have been a change in behaviour recently by the whales. I think it is down to their ability to choose on a sliding scale how many $$$s their upvote will give. This lets them give to a lot more people. The "stars" are no longer getting 4 figure sums for releasing press releases, and smaller authors with interesting things to say are getting about $100 in total. It's a step in the right direction

As an aside - how many new articles have you voted for today? I've love to see an experiment where whales and dolphins decided to spend a day voting exclusively from the "new" section, and to see what effect that has on the front page...

The comment section seems once again devoured by discussions on "whale behaviour" vs answring the question you ask: good content, what exactly is?

Ok. here's my take:

Good content is first and foremost WELL WRITTEN.
Good content is original/ well researched/well edited.
Good content is informative and understandable.
Good content is creative.
Good content is inspiring.
Good content is expressing your view in your voice and bringing something to the table.
Good content is a revelation, you know it when you read it.

IF the whales upvote or not, good content IS GOOD CONTENT. I don't see any reason to doubt your quality just because you did not hit the "expected" reward. Whales, just like you and me, have different standards and views, and while their votes are worth 1000x my vote, the value of our opinion is EQUAL. That's why if i upvote this but @summon doesn't, it's should still be a compliment...IF you think my taste is good of course.
Now, you tend to think that people who like us have good taste so it's hard to stay objective, but let's not put an equal between money and quality of content, because then, we're doomed :)

that being said, I notice you follow only 16 people. That's a pity man. I wrote on this more here and I'm gonna paste this to many popular authors and try to get them [' and you ] to follow more. you really can't find another 50 good people ot follow?! I found 2 just from the comments here!

https://steemit.com/steemit/@razvanelulmarin/my-steemit-main-page-my-feed-why-i-follow-as-many-people-as-i-m-being-followed-by

You're right in that quality posting is truly in the mind of the reader. That is part of what makes the upvoting system work. I tend to worry little about what the whales are doing or not doing.

I upvote on a piece I believe has a message and is well written. I have to admit a bias though. If I have to wade through huge paragraphs, it takes an extremely well written piece to hold my attention long enough to decide to vote.

I try to find at least two new writers to follow every day and then start my day off reading and voting on my feed.

You have a good strategy on how to find new content. GJ!
The whales are at work, more balanced now with the vote weight/scale implemented.

It's true that for a post to be of good quality(=successful) it needs to be marketed properly, starting with the title and then with the first paragraphs. Long posts that I think are worth reading after checking the first paragraphs I send them to my kindle with a nifty little Chrome extension. Then I really enjoy them in traditional reading.

How do we describe a good content?

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

How much maximum upvotes in post did you see???? I think it is too early for good content) but we can see dynamic

https://steemit.com/steemit/@t3ran13/philosohpy-of-steemit-way-from-theory-to-reality

The content that becomes popular is mainly made so by the power of a small handful of Steemit users. And then the rest follow, hoping to get some of those sweet curation rewards. "Upvote herding" as @anduweb calls it. I know I'm guilty of it too.

We should try to give all content a chance, not just the posts that might make us share in the wealth.

I don't know what just happened, before I up voted this post it was at 57.00, now that I clicked it's at 183.68.

Well, you should upvote every post! :D Steemstats show it was upvoted by 2 whales just before you voted.

That's pretty amazing man :)

it may take some time until things chill...or...if the platform explodes, things may go wild. we'll live to see it.

For me a qualit post is that one with which the author is satisfied, is necessary to have a lot of variety. But I believe that the problem of steemit is in what you say, the people are not objective, vote for what the whales vote, are all the same if they like it or not, or they vote for the author because they know that it is going to have a good reward do not vote to the content. In the moment in which the persons vote what they like without importing anything more WE ALL will grow in steemit.

If I could up vote this a million time I would. one thing I will never do is follow the crowed and that includes whales.

Fantastic post. My favourite quote which sums things up is:

In a way, we're all sheeps and we have some shepherds.

Because of this distorted understanding of content, Steеm is in trouble. Registrations are picked up, but not and active users.

To catch a whale one must make noise like a seal.

I was thinking about writing a post on this exact subject! "Our objective point of view is getting blurred by posting what we think whales will love"

I agree, well said. I'm a nobody on steemit but I vote freely and purely for enjoyment and what I value.