RE: LeoFinance Engagement | I Just Sent Out 1400 LEO to Everyone Who Beat Me Last Week
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I'm also going to create a weekly competition for evergreen content. That is, every week I will send 100 LEO to the top ranking post in terms of external traffic that it generates.
First of all, this is indeed awesome. Like I have said before, optimized content is the most valuable thing for us due to the organic traffic it will generate, but optimized content is still being overlooked or often ignored by the curators. There are various reasons for this to happen, but to see something that is put in place to reward such content is amazing.
According to my understanding of the things you've said Khal, I would probably do things differently. 100 LEO for the top ranking post is totally fine, and even though there is only 1 winner with a prize like that, everyone will be real winners when things takes off.
I am a bit worried for different reasons: The first one is having only 1 prize. I don't mean that you have to have thousands of LEO in total, but I think it would be easier for people to create optimized content if they had "higher chances" of winning the prize, so to speak.
Perhaps extra rewards for the top 5 posts or so? That could potentially mean that the same author wins multiple prizes, but it would also increase the overall chance for people to win something.
Not sure how this would actually work out in reality, but what about 100% upvotes with leo.voter +curators pick on optimized content that has potential to generate traffic over time? - It would require some time reading and looking at things from an "optimized" perspective, to see if the content has potential or not.
Also:
I'm also going to create a weekly competition for evergreen content. That is, every week I will send 100 LEO to the top ranking post in terms of external traffic that it generates.
You may notice that some of these posts are actually several months old. That means that authors could literally earn 100 LEO per week on old content that is ranking well.
While I truly love the idea, I shared my thoughts in a comment previously:
Rewarding the top article each week would basically be like giving one of the two authors LEO for several weeks or even months without much competition due to the current rankings.
However, you said "weekly competition for evergreen content" which could mean that this will be on-going for a long, long time. If you are willing to put in those extra LEO to reward content that pulls in the most organic traffic, and your intention is to do that for a long period of time, it would definitely inspire and encourage people to produce optimized content.
The top 2 authors would literally be handed hundreds if not thousands of LEOs for content they wrote a long time ago though, before other content could compete in terms of traffic.. But that would most certainly inspire people to make optimized content as they would see how easy it is to earn 100% passive LEO rewards for something they make once.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
New content doesn't bring in organic traffic, which is why content that has already been ranked would continue to sit on top of things until other content was ranked properly. That would probably take anything between 3-6 months.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
This could be solved by the last question I posed to you in my comment above. Let me know what you think.
A secondary idea would be to have some sort of “depreciation” of “content ranking” that we give a piece.
It seems that if this became a problem, we’d need some sort of ranking algorithm that accounted for it.
Otherwise, if it’s fixed in 3 months anyways because 100 more authors start creating optimized content, maybe its a moot point
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Haven't thought about this, but the first thing that comes to mind is having a limit of the prizes.
Like: X amount of LEO is the absolute most you can generate for one article. That way, people will have to produce more optimized content as well, to be able to earn this sweet and juicy passive LEO rewards.
Judging by your previous comment, it sounds like you'd be fine with rewarding the same authors thousands of LEO if that content is generating the most traffic, so what about having a limit of say 2K LEO or something per article.
I feel that it would bring more competition as well, because even if you have the most awesome content you've ever seen and it brings in billions of visitors, you'd still need to come up with more optimized content to continue to earn those extra LEO once you've reached your limit so to speak.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I think increasing it to 5 posts that get rewarded is a great idea.
I would love it if we could do this but the one issue with this is that the optimized content has likely already left the voting window. We could upvote one of their newer posts with 100% but I feel like that logistically defeats the purpose which is why I went with the liquid LEO rewards each week because then we don’t have to worry about voting windows.
That is absolutely right. My goal would be to do this for the foreseeable future (perhaps in perpetuity, if it goes well).
Yes, I agree it could cause some authors to get thousands of LEO. Though that would mean that their content is pulling in massive traffic for the site which likely outweighs the actual LEO they’re receiving (in terms of LeoFinance gaining more value from that traffic than the 100 LEO each week is worth).
I wonder if we can create some sort of ranking variables? I.e. newer content that pulls in traffic is weighted more heavily than older content that pulls in the same amount of traffic?
Some sort of x * y variable on time vs. traffic per week.
Thoughts?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
based if in perpetuity and expanded
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Awesome. That sure definitely encourage more people to create posts.
I can totally understand your point. What I meant was if we would go the route of rewarding content that has "real potential to bring organic traffic" rather than rewarding content for the organic traffic it already brings.
Fair point. One issue with this is the fact that one could rather easily manipulate the results by pushing fake- or non-organic traffic to certain pages. It can be done in ways so it's rather difficult to spot at first glance and even though it could harm us in the long haul, like being banned so we can't earn Ad Revenue anymore, it's an "amazing way" for abusers to make sure they win LEO prizes short-term.
The last is obviously worst case scenario, but like the saying goes: greed brings out the worst in us.
That being said, one can obviously spot this type of abuse by looking into certain details, but it's also something one have to spend time doing.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta