Some ideas for future POB Delegations from @proofofbrainio
After posting a question to the POB community and @proofofbrainio about current delegations in this post: https://www.proofofbrain.io/hive-167922/@scooter77/pob-delegations-from-proofofbrainio-what-are-the-terms-conditions-and-opportunities-for-delegations
I received a response from @proofofbrainio in a comment:
So I have decided to write this post and put it out there to the community and try and get some ideas around what delegations could be offered by @proofofbrainio.
Here is my idea for a delegation to get things started:
- A pob-curation or similar account is created and a chunk of POB is delegated to this account from @proofofbrainio
- Members of the community are selected (three) to be in charge of this account and have access to the posting key to upvote content - this occurs through a community nomination process with some criteria set
- All curation rewards from this curation account are sent to @pob-fund to fund future development of the POB tribe
- A generic comment is placed on posts upvoted by the curation account and these can be upvoted by the community to contribute to the curation account. All liquid/author rewards earnt by the curation account are to be sent to pob-fund account
- Curation team members receive one 100% upvote per week from the curation account on a worthwhile post OR other reward as determined by the community. I feel that a small reward for the curation teams work across a week is important to ensure there is incentive to find the best content.
- A weekly post from the curation team highlighting great content to assist others in rewarding great POB content.
This takes away some responsibility and effort from @proofofbrainio for curation and places accountability back into the hands of active community members to reward the right content and ensure the trending and hot pages are representing the content the community wants.
Please leave some constructive comments around my idea and whether this might benefit the tribe.
I'd like to get some additional engagement going on this topic through this post to try and get some ideas together for @proofofbrainio so if you have any ideas use the tag #pob-curation when posting your ideas so they can be easily found via tag. I think that by utilising delegations in the right way, it will enhance the community, further develop the tribe and increase the token price making this the most valuable HIVE tribe.
Thanks for reading and I look forward to comments around my idea and what others might suggest.
I have set 50% of rewards from this post to @pob-fund (It is nearly Friday here in Australia!)
I agree with all of your points but I will select some of them and answer them
I personally agreed with the points I quoted above, It will be wise to leave most of the work of curation to active members in the community. So that they can find quality articles, and encourage authors around the community. This will help boost our trending posts, and will attention to our community. At the same, the curators will be rewarded on the initiative of the community.
If I do have future points to add, I will go ahead and write about them, and the #pob-curation tag as you explained. Thank you
All seems fine to me
I will vote for you to be one of the 3 :p who better than you ?
We can have a voting from all community members to choose the 3 people if this goes through .
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
C'mon man, "All seems fine to me" yet there is a glaringly obvious issue with the proposal (something any paranoid and security-sensitive person would pick up on in a flash).
To add, I'm not going to say how @onealfa should use his stake (never have, never will), but here is a nice meaty upvote to @informationvault's comment which isn't necessarily up there on the amazing scale, but it does raise some alarm to me when @informationvault has a habit of leaving empty comments (see below, just from today) and not exactly putting his money where his mouth is (no staked POB, some selling of POB, the selling I have no concern with since there are a mixture of reasons why this could be the case).
Not a great example of responsible voting but oh well.
https://he.dtools.dev/@informationvault?symbol=POB
Oh yeah, he also got rumbled for plagiarism today too. Link here.
Just pointing some stuff out, @onealfa must be sick of my opinion getting flicked in his direction but I just say it how I see it. I'm more than willing to admit when I'm wrong or being a jackass.
My vote is on people who are vigilant and truly understand the power behind their vote and what it means for the platforms overall health.
Ugh. These are the type of people who only try to suck out value from a system. The comments are so generic that I feel like they should not be rewarded at all. Not to mention the plagiarism.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yup, it's painfully obvious to notice. Not too sure what the best way to handle it is other than pointing it out for others to see.
I think this could work. Hopefully, it will help to boost engagement in the community.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Only if the curators give equal weightage to comments like they give to posts . There shouldn't be any bias.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
That is a good question. I think in general posts get bigger weights but there can be more quantity in comments. So I guess it would depend on them reading the comment section or not.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Your post was promoted by @tfranzini
It's not a bad suggestion by any means, but I can see a potential issue that could cause problems.
This could open up a door to potential abuse with no way to hold any specific person accountable. The countermeasure is then changing keys or removing delegation completely which are both not ideal options.
Opening the door for abuse could also be tempting since I don't believe one 100% upvote per week is sufficient per person for the time and effort it takes to do quality manual curation, especially with no personal rewards being received from said curation (curating is a huge responsibility with a larger stake and it's the cog in the machine that makes POB what it is).
I understand that the point above is dependant on the stake size of the account and a 100% upvote will vary, I just know personally that manual curation isn't all smooth sailing and can eat into your time quite easily.
I think this idea is on the right track although I believe that individual accountability is the most important factor when delegations are assigned.
Maybe I'm biased because I'm sitting here with a 5,000 POB delegation, but I know first hand that my behaviors are clear for all to see and if I abuse the power I've been given with this delegation I fully expect it to be taken away. That is the level of accountability that can be precisely pinned on me alone.
I encourage people to follow my voting habits and transfer activity via https://hivestats.io/@calumam and call me out if there is anything that is alarming. I also have a post here which lays out more information regarding my efforts here on the platform.
Well yeah the 100% upvote per week definitely depends on the stake and see many are already manually curating . If we pick the 3 members from those manual curators then it is not "Extra" work for them right ?
100% upvote is just a bonus for them .
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
My point was more directed towards the accountability factor, the upvote isn't a huge deal in the grand scheme of things, just that it's a contributing factor to what makes the efforts of curating on the account worthwhile for the individual.
It seems like it may be better to set up an account to curation trail follow these three members and then they can receive the upvote from the account at the end of the week or whatever. This reduces the chance for abuse and curation trails can be easily disconnected if anything fishy goes on without the need to change the posting key or remove the delegation.
If it was a separate account that those three members had the keys for, they'd have to curate on their own account and then the curation account which would mean more work.
That's exactly what went through my mind too . Instead of sharing keys , it is better to set them on curation trail for the 3 users whom the community votes .
Yeah and eventually they will start following the trail of the "separate account" .
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
It seems like the best way to help out with the distribution, there just needs to be a process where these people can lay down their stats and method for curation (not sure if that's totally necessary but it helps).
I'm not clued up to how this has played out in the past on the main side of HIVE, but if someone has any arguments against this I'm interested. How did OCD, Curie, etc start operations? And what issues are now present that should be avoided, or at the least, be prepared to tackle?
i agree 100%, i'm not even near a good manual curation, but everyday i learn a bit more how to accurate my curation
Sounds very good to me .
let the POB holders vote for who the three members should be . I will help gathering the votes based on percentage of holdings etc etc .
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I think that like several comments I saw, it would not be a good idea 3 people with access to an account it is obvious that anyone could make a mistake and point to another party, if I am honest and I hope this is taken as a very personal opinion and It shouldn't influence anything at all. The issue of delegations seems to haunt those who have a greater interest in providing quality content and at the same time receiving feedback, lately it seems like a race to unionize, contrary to what should be a community that is just laying its foundations and is facing challenges, I am sure that we all see the effort of each one here, and we do not have to cover the sun with a finger, there are many users who do it really well, and if I am correct it will only be a matter of time for the merit to touch their door, either in the form of a delegation or a compliment from community members. It would be great if this effort that is now being made was redirected to solving other aspects of the community. greetings to all and I wish you much success, because luck is for losers!
I think you should let the people with delegations have their curation rewards.
The system is based on the fact, that the curation reward equals the authors reward. So its equally valuable.
It shouldn't be too much of a reward considering the responsibility they have to carry.
I think the general critia here is good as it will help PoB grow but I am wondering how all of this will be processed?
I haven't been following along as much is there a good way for people to choose the curators?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Lots of great feedback and questions around aspects of the proposal which is what I was looking for. There could be some issues with having three people hold the same posting keys and possible abuse but it would completely depend upon the people selected and their integrity. If they abused, yes there would be a need to change posting keys but that persons legitimacy here on POB would be all but gone and it would be POBicide for someone to do so.
Curating is a huge responsibility so I guess another form of reward for curators could be determined in a collaborative manner.
These are just suggestions and there would be some tweaking to do. Suggestions make proposals into workable solutions.
Congratulations @scooter77.pob! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Your next target is to reach 600 upvotes.
Your next target is to reach 200 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out the last post from @hivebuzz:
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!