Rather than focusing on the rest of your reply, I am going to focus on this section:
Read the post, don't copy paste instantly the text. Read the previous posts of the author, read how they comment, their wallet history, how they construct their English sentences, then ask the probing questions before jumping the gun.
As part of our trail of votes, we already chose this approach over Helios in the DV aspect, to do our best to read and DV only when necessary.
This exchange of ideas was valuable to me as it taught me a lot. I appreciate your time as I am not yet ready to be able to sit during this discussion, as this is beyond my capabilities and the information I handle.
Telling me you wont focus on the rest of my reply is one way to disrespect the input I have placed as I have given consideration your input with due response. Whether this was the intended outcome you want or not is no longer a concern to me.
Will you take back that donwvote from Dennnmarc's post given how benign their use of quillbot AI was intended as a means to correct grammar and not be lazy? And they didn't know what they were doing. It seems odd that the downvote still applies like the message has been lumped with the post being the product of those who willfully chose to game the system which it wasn't. I dont have any vested interest whether the downvote on the post stays or not, i am more curious on your perception of whether it is still right to keep it there.
I appreciate you being civil with the exchange of ideas. Please consider adding more diversity to the roster of authors you support. I don't mind being obnoxious at this suggestion but if you do expand yout list of authors curated and reduce the number of times some authors receive frequent votes, I think the reward distribution would be spread out and it benefits more people at no loss for the program since 50% of the value always returns back. At the very least, that small change brings more long term improvement despite the short term snag in differences of opinion.
O.K. @adamanda we removed the vote. I see your point and I don't think we'll be targeting posts like that which were basically "grammarly" checked with ai. That was one of our earlier flags and since we have refined our search criteria. That post wasn't just thrown together with ai in one chunk in a few seconds, the author put work into it. In the past, I've made posts like that myself using ai to help smooth out segments of my grammar and word choice too, and will probably check out quillbot myself in the future since it seems to be acceptable in certain circumstances.
As for our curation, I hope you noticed that @coininstant and @helios.voter are not part of the curation. Instead, we give our curation to anyone in the community that joins our community. Unfortunately, we don't have a lot of users yet, so it seems like a tight knot circle, but we're working on mitigating that by upvoting a few different authors and I'm thinking of ways to spread out the distribution like maybe randomizing the vote one day a week to be a lottery.
Thanks for insisting on behalf of Dennnmarc's post, your reasoning opened our eyes to our faults on this matter. We are flexible at HELIOS and are always open to feedback from others in the community.