Viewing a response to: @anggreklestari/py5zn2
> I see many old users on Steem that can't earn more than 1 Steem, even with good content. Exactly! > Sometimes I feel surrendered to post good content because there are no "big users" who care about my posts. Don't surrender, please! :)
| author | jaki01 |
|---|---|
| permlink | py6700 |
| category | steem |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-09-21 07:19:12 |
| last_update | 2019-09-21 07:19:12 |
| depth | 2 |
| children | 3 |
| last_payout | 2019-09-28 07:19:12 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| promoted | 0.000 HBD |
| body_length | 240 |
| author_reputation | 543,016,476,553,785 |
| root_title | "Proof of Brain? 'Proof of Popularity'!" |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 90,784,163 |
| net_rshares | 12,604,745,695 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| hdu | 0 | 4,050,451,579 | 0.91% | ||
| delabo | 0 | 8,554,294,116 | 3% |
Although a good content is very subjective, I still think small stake users who write mundane topics should be highlighted as well. However with curation projects, there are criteria that have to be met, hence why, it's really tricky to catch all the good *fish* in the net. I am still positive that at least users who consistently write a decent to great content, definitely attracts curators and *big* users.
| author | macchiata |
|---|---|
| permlink | py6t0q |
| category | steem |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-09-21 15:14:54 |
| last_update | 2019-09-21 15:14:54 |
| depth | 3 |
| children | 2 |
| last_payout | 2019-09-28 15:14:54 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| promoted | 0.000 HBD |
| body_length | 411 |
| author_reputation | 1,408,758,551,583,031 |
| root_title | "Proof of Brain? 'Proof of Popularity'!" |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 90,793,705 |
| net_rshares | 88,407,369,932 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| jaki01 | 0 | 88,407,369,932 | 3% |
> Although a good content is very subjective ... Partly subjective. There <em>are</em> certain criteria helping to evaluate the quality of content, for example: - Are orthography and grammar correct? - How is the quality of included pictures and videos (that's measurable)? - Does the author offer verifiable sources to back his claims? - Does a post contain explanations, own thoughts, new ideas? Curation projects have good intentions (and partly positive effects), but the trend of making whitelists with 'trustable' authors involves the risk to upvote certain users rather often, whereas others get nearly nothing. Actually, I think one should try to spread one's upvotes on as many different users as possible and evaluate <em>content</em> independantly of <em>who</em> created it. > I am still positive ... Nice, lets hope together that in the end that turns out to be justified. :)
| author | jaki01 |
|---|---|
| permlink | py6u82 |
| category | steem |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-09-21 15:40:51 |
| last_update | 2019-09-21 15:40:51 |
| depth | 4 |
| children | 1 |
| last_payout | 2019-09-28 15:40:51 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.548 HBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.548 HBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| promoted | 0.000 HBD |
| body_length | 892 |
| author_reputation | 543,016,476,553,785 |
| root_title | "Proof of Brain? 'Proof of Popularity'!" |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 90,794,424 |
| net_rshares | 3,974,067,051,224 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| macchiata | 0 | 20,179,716,023 | 100% | ||
| wherein | 0 | 3,953,887,335,201 | 100% |
I agree with grammar conservatism. It's still though, personally, when I curate I also look at the substance of the post. Also, thank you for your insight. That helped me evaluate what I did in the past. Hopefully, I'll become a better content curator.
| author | macchiata |
|---|---|
| permlink | py6wkz |
| category | steem |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
| created | 2019-09-21 16:31:48 |
| last_update | 2019-09-21 16:31:48 |
| depth | 5 |
| children | 0 |
| last_payout | 2019-09-28 16:31:48 |
| cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
| total_payout_value | 0.010 HBD |
| curator_payout_value | 0.010 HBD |
| pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
| promoted | 0.000 HBD |
| body_length | 254 |
| author_reputation | 1,408,758,551,583,031 |
| root_title | "Proof of Brain? 'Proof of Popularity'!" |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 90,795,570 |
| net_rshares | 100,926,991,216 |
| author_curate_reward | "" |
| voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| jaki01 | 0 | 100,926,991,216 | 4% |
hiveblocks