Honestly, I don't see the difference between rewarding the upvoting and resteeming, when it comes to people who are abusing the system. You and I might be careful about what we resteem, but the accounts who are abusing the system don't care about what's being resteemed in their account. They're in it just for a quick buck.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
That's true I suppose. It could still be abused by curation reward hunters.
But from the perspective of the writer and the reader (to put perhaps too sharp a point on it, "the ones who are looking at the article and not the price marker), it's a sign of who recognizes quality early on, and who is just following along with what others said was popular.
Alternatively (and this only occurred to me as I was typing this), what if the site could be modified so that the value marker on a post or comment was only visible to the person who posted it?
Think about it. It would enable people who are posting to know how valuable their content is in the eyes of the community, but anyone who is just prowling around hoping to pounce on a quick curation reward would be wandering blind.
Anyway, these ideas may all have flaws. I'm just kind of brainstorming at this point.
I still don't see much difference with the current version, because people who upvote a post with already high number of upvotes don't get much of the curation reward. The system favors early upvoters.
Your proposal would make a difference if every upvote to a post was rewarded the same. That is not the case at the moment.