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 WEKU!
Sort Order:  trending

We are sick too of curation reports some personal blogs front page are just curation reports.

That needs to go.

From the 1st of may we will be flagging curation comment spam.

Curation reports are a way of farming weku and if it is used as payment for services it should move to POW comments.

But that is out of our hands.

·

100% I agree with you.

Please lead by example and start creating original content.

Buenas noches Hadrien! En parte coincido con vos y en parte creo que deberíamos separar un poco las aguas.

Es cierto que hoy no solo suben reportes de curación los grupos creados para tal fin, sino también he visto reportes de usuarios que apoyan a un par de posteos y suben una publicación mencionando a las publicaciones curadas.

Muchas veces también puede inferirse que son la exteriorización de voto que podría llegar a tomarse como un toma y dame. En definitiva si uno mira sus publicaciones puede observar quien los vota y quién no o bien recurrir al WekuNow.

El problema con las publicaciones de curación es que la una gran porción no solo que no controlan la originalidad del material que cura, sino que ni siquiera se molesta en hacer un reporte de curación agradable y creativo, que lleve trabajo de edición , que tenga un sello distintivo de quién lo hace.

Para que la plataforma crezca y tenga éxito a lo largo del tiempo es necesario realizar contenido original tratando siempre de poner lo mejor de uno para que el material sea exportable, para que tengan un valor agregado.

Hay otros reportes de curación que tienen un trabajo de edición increíble lo cual lleva mucho tiempo y un gran trabajo de edición.

Con separar las aguas me refiero a visualizar que hay grupos de curación y personas que hacen un excelente trabajo de curación controlando la originalidad del material que votan y que son realmente objetivos a la hora de escoger las publicaciones a curar y dejame decirte que realmente estos buscan la excelencia.

Estos grupos le dan un valor extra a las publicaciones y lo que es mucho más importante a WEKU, entonces porque no dar la posibilidad a estos grupos que hagan sus reportes si en definitiva los wekus obtenidos lo utilizan para incrementar su poder de voto y por ende la recompensa que distribuyen.

Para mencionarte alguno que tengo en mente puedo mencionarte a @curacion.spanish, @zeal, @gratefulbives entre los más conocidos y que a mi criterio trabajan realmente bien.

Otro que funciona muy bien en cuanto a la responsabilidad en el proceso de curación es el reciente @madeinweku. Realmente este último es un proyecto muy interesante para WEKU ya que premia a contenido de original y de calidad que es generado para Weku y recien en compartido en otras redes después de 1 o 2 días de publicado aquí. Esto es sumamente importante.

Está otorgando a la plataforma un valor agregado impresionante y quién se encarga de la tarea de curación es un claro ejemplo a seguir por todos.

Por ello a mi criterio creo que se debería limitarse la cantidad de reportes de curación permitiendo a los grupos que realmente trabajan bien y a conciencia la posibilidad de hacer sus reportes al menos día por medio para hacer crecer esos proyectos que en definitiva se terminan utilizando en para incentivar los buenos contenidos dentro de la plataforma.

·

Good evening, Hadrien! In part I agree with you and in part I think we should separate the waters a little.

It is true that not only do groups created for this purpose come up with reports of healing, but I have also seen reports from users who support a couple of posts and upload a publication mentioning curated publications.

Many times it can also be inferred that they are the externalization of the vote that could be taken as a take and give. In short, if you look at your publications, you can see who votes them and who does not or turn to WekuNow.

The problem with healing publications is that the large portion not only that they do not control the originality of the material that heals, but that they do not even bother to make a pleasant and creative healing report, that it takes editing work, that it has a distinctive seal of who does it.

In order for the platform to grow and be successful over time, it is necessary to make original content, always trying to put the best of one so that the material is exportable, so that they have an added value.

There are other healing reports that have an incredible editing job which takes a lot of time and a great editing job.

With separating the waters I mean to visualize that there are healing groups and people who do an excellent job of healing controlling the originality of the material they vote and that are really objective when it comes to choosing publications to cure and let me tell you that they are really looking for the excellence.

These groups give an extra value to the publications and what is much more important to WEKU, then why not give the possibility to these groups to make their reports if in the end the wekus obtained use it to increase their voting power and therefore the reward they distribute.

To mention one I have in mind I can mention @ curacion.spanish, @zeal, @gratefulbives among the best known and that in my opinion they work really well.

Another one that works very well in terms of responsibility in the healing process is the recent @madeinweku. Actually this last one is a very interesting project for WEKU since it rewards original content and quality that is generated for Weku and recently shared in other networks after 1 or 2 days of being published here. This is extremely important.

It is giving the platform an impressive added value and who is responsible for the healing task is a clear example to follow for all.

Therefore, in my opinion, I believe that the number of healing reports should be limited, allowing groups that really work well and conscientiously to make their reports at least every other day to grow those projects that ultimately end up being used in encourage good content within the platform.

Amen to that. Wow, did we agree on something?

yes I also feel sad, a lot of the content is not original but has so much noise, and many people also write their original content but their voices are few, I appreciate original content even though it is as simple as possible compared to non-original writing

Of course, the curation reports are boring, but they must be done in order to let people know and make each community grow, so I think one or two weekly reports would be better, I think every day is a lot. It is always a question of doing a good job, in addition there are many people who already have enough power in weku, so we have to support the weakest people with good content.
I propose that there be fewer reports per week, with a higher percentage of votes to the people who really deserve it, and we also need a lot of weku publicity so that more people arrive.
The reports are good but there must be content of variety in all the communities, in this way a toxic circle is not generated.
Abrazo compatriota Handrien!!!

·

yes, I agree with you. just one or two reports.

It is a Moderator task. As a Moderator you should know this. And promoting good content is not a bad work at all.

·

I don't speak only of moderators. This task really looks like spam. I bet that if a moderator is asked about the content of the publication that he votes, he will not know what the content of the publication is.

·
·

Only moderators publishing curation reports from the beginning. I also can bet that every moderators read blog before voting. I am following most moderators regularly and I know that well. It's true that some moderators are inactive and do not want to fulfil their tasks. But this number is very few. Except those, everyone is doing great.
One more thing: If you think that a moderator is not performing his duties properly then you have an option called complaint.

·
·
·

I will not waste my time complaining about something so obvious. anyway...

I understand completely.
GV community curates quality GV content.
We leave our comment, letting them know.
I write the daily post, M-F.
What do you suggest? One curation post per week?
This is an important dialog, and I'm open to suggestions.

·

I would say one or two reports per week.

·
·

I'm thinking twice per week, and calling it the "GV Journal."

I understand your position and I think this needs a deep analysis.
The accounts of projects need to post to feed the power of voting, otherwise the accounts will be relegated and will not have the capacity to serve the community, this is what has been done since weku was born, even more now that we are about to go to the market.

The report is a means to move the economy of these projects, There is a huge job involved behind each report and maybe it is not being seen.

They are long hours here checking post, before putting a vote and making a report.

Example: yesterday I was here more than 5 hours reviewing post, images, text, sources, valuing the content. Then writing the report of the post highlights, but not a cold list of all post curated.

I agree that a report of these has little audience, very little. But it is necessary to do it because not everyone has the funds to survive just for curation rewards.

Another very different topic is the real impact of the project on the community.

·

There is a problem with that logic .

In theory curation projects should have their own WP or a delegation to perform their tasks and their revenue should come from curation rewards, and slightly complemented by curation reports.

This is a common misconception from steemit, where the only way to to make a dime is to kinda farm the platform.

Weku has been generous with project initiatives delegating for free to help the projects take off, but the worse that can happen to weku is that projects make a standard practice report farming.
If a project does, why a user cannot do it?

Because of the greater good you might say... But then what about of those who hiding behind that ,line their pockets by distributing 40% of the voting power between their collaborators and only return to the community the remaining 60% (actually 50 because there is also the self vote of the report)

The linx guys have me covered in requests of data extractions because they are analyzing the vote pattern of projects to see if there are some worth supporting.

Then there is also the fact that who is going to invest in weku to setup a curation project when you can happily farm your way into a whale ?

These are things the need a careful balance and most of all a change of direction, I have had trouble stopping some corrective measures linx wants to implement as i believe in dialog and education.

If project believe that the only way to grow is by farming reports then we all are doing something wrong.

Maybe we need to support less projects with more WP, we definitively need stop paying to blockchain workers with report spam farming, it is destroying their blogs and the weku experience.

I was hesitant when my employer moved our payment to POW comments, but i see now where they were coming from.

Weku is a brave new world, lets move on the right direction and not repeat the sins of the fathers

·
·

It is correct, I have said, that a project should essentially fulfill its mission of supporting the community and doing responsible work. If this is not the case, the support the project receives should be suspended. If the work is of poor quality, the same thing.

As a decentralized entity, it is up to the community to report on this.

I still think that it is necessary to feed the project with publications, at least until it is sustainable on its own, there are small projects here that have been doing good work for a long time, and they don't have delegations and don't have the capacity to invest either. They dedicate good hours to weku and they do it with passion. They deserve to be here and grow at the same time. Weku must be an inclusive place. Righteous should not pay for sinners, even if others say the world is like this, everyone can contribute to make this a better place. I love relativities.

I've been here since September, I've been a pretty active user, I've even been relegated to other networks, what caught me here at weku was just that, big and small supporting the community.
The house needs cleaning, yes. There's a lot to clean up. Let's make sure that cleaning doesn't throw away things that are clean and work well in the home.

that's nothing, look how they pay off rewards those "reports"
to that add the comments bots

users who vote these types of posts are important users within the haha platform

The reasons I have been making curation reports

  1. I am a moderator from the beginning. I spent lots of time to encourage good contents. I upvote many users, but only the best 10 can on my digest. The reason I make the reports because I would like to introduce those great posts to others. If the wekuians don't have time to surf Weku, they can read my reports and support those authors in my reports.
  2. @siamcat ask all the moderators and community leaders to make reports so that she can make sure we are doing our jobs.
  3. I spents hours to work for Weku team as a moderator. Weku team doesn't pay me any. Making posts is the only way I can get some payment from Weku. Actually, I only get about 150~300 for my posts, including curation reports or my own posts. It's definitely not enough for paying for 5+ hours working every day.