As someone who spends most of his time on the PC and now and then try to take breaks from Hive to do something more casual like gaming or browsing some other sites such as Twitter and Reddit, I've often been meaning/wanting to share some things I find interesting from time to time. The way Hive works, though, has been kind of a roadblock wanting to just share content you find that's not yours.
I've kinda been wondering about the limits of that and what the community would deem valuable enough to be rewarded along with effort having gone into compiling it, adding some of my own thoughts and notes towards each piece of content, etc.
For a long time I've also been wanting to create a few communities that users could use with some caveats behind it for the rewards, which I wanted to talk about in this post a bit.
For instance let's imagine the community Ask Hive that I created a long time ago but most of the time doesn't get a lot of attention or traffic. The idea behind it is simple, ask open-ended questions that may result in discussions, things like: What do you think about the governance of DPOS?
The issue here is, autovotes and other blind curators may not care to look into what the content of certain users is before blindly voting up posts. This then results in some people taking the opportunity of the community to just farm their daily upvotes by just asking something low effort and moving on with their day. Whenever I've used the same community, I've been trying to add some content into the post partly due to autovotes but also to get people engaging as the community's been quite inactive as I mentioned. Whenever there hasn't really been anything much to say about it, I've just forfeited part or all post rewards through the beneficiary system by sending them to @hive.fund for instance or @poshtoken which is something I consider to benefit all of Hive rather than one entity or personal profit.
There too, though, is hard to enforce or ask people to abide by the same etiquette and you may then face issues and drama if you have to start using downvotes. Same thing about other similar communities if someone with less stake were to get them started and they'd start getting visitors with higher stake, they wouldn't even be able to counter such post farming abuse themselves and it may end up with a few bigger stakeholders using their community for farming. Muting such users may also not be the thing smaller stakeholders would want to risk doing neither.
So the idea came to mind there then instead, where you force people to set beneficiaries towards a certain account from the beginning. Platforms such as @peakd can give you options to moderate your community based on that, but as of yet I don't think it automatically mutes posts that don't abide by the rules. We have for instance the setting on in the OCD community to automatically send 10% to @poshtoken whenever people post there, partly to avoid having people often post things there they could've posted in a more fitting community and partly to help fund the POSH service with some extra rewards.
Why and how would one enforce it and what would you do with the rewards that go towards a certain account?
The idea behind it is, if you want to share/post something with low effort in the initial post, you're not supposed to accept all of the rewards you receive. We also did try this idea in the "Manipulation Station" (similar to r/photoshopbattles) community, where it worked well, although manually operated by me. If you'd like to post there anyway, you'd have to forfeit say 90% of the post rewards to an account, let's call the account "@discussions" for the sake of the next example.
Let's say I post a short, low effort post into the community, 90% of rewards would go to @dicussions. @discussions would take the rewards and liquidate them similar to how @reward.app or @nomnomnomnom currently do it. The account would then wait for all comments of the post to have been paid out after 7 days of creation and distribute the 90% of the beneficiaries it received as tips towards all comments based on the amount of curation they received by stakeholders.
To continue the example, let's say I asked: "Why do you hate tomatoes?"
There's then 50 comments asking me what's wrong with me and another 10 of them agreeing at how gross they are but fine as ketchup/sauce.
Some of them I may have responded to and curated, received more replies, etc.
The bot would take the, let's say $20 that were generated in Hive by the post and distribute them evenly among all comments that received curation, but myself included as the original poster as long as I didn't selfvote but received upvotes from other people in the comment section.
Alright so, what is the point of this?
Well, for starters it would allow people to "shitpost" without having to switch to an alt account, having to reblog the alt account to get the engagement your main account would, etc. At the same time it would encourage engagement based on the rewards OP would receive, it would give Hive Power another usecase in that way. To be able to receive some of those rewards back you'd have to also engage on your own shitpost with everyone else engaging in it. At the end of the week, it would look like a nice post with a rich engagement and a lot of tips flying around all over the comment section, giving consumers something to consume who are into those kind of open-ended discussions.
This could work for a lot more communities and ideas behind them as well.
Communities where you just want to share an article and see what people have to say about it.
Communities where you just want to share some piece of news, divided based on what genre/niche it's about; crypto, stocks, politics, climate, science, etc.
At the same time the bot could have some extra features such as the missing "mute post if beneficiaries aren't set as required", give community leaders some kind of settings on what they want their default beneficiaries to be, how to distribute them, i.e. based on reputation of accounts, ignore muted comments/accounts, etc. It would probably also require some maintenance which it could take a fee from the beneficiaries of.
Now this is of course not something for everyone, but with a growing userbase you could see this having potential to be used and thrive with these settings in mind. Some people may of course not post there and choose to put in a little more effort instead to get all of their rewards in other communities. Some could post but not have any autovotes to give out but if there's genuine demand to engage with said author it could be a way to curate his following without the author himself having a large autovotes or stake to self-vote the posts he'd distribute to the comments with.
There are some similar concepts and ideas out there already, I wrote a post some time ago about a project called Hive-bounty but that one requires you to up front send hive to reward the engagement in certain posts with, maybe they'd be up for also undertaking the rest of this idea. Although being paranoid I'd prefer the owner keys to be in mine or multisigged between reputable users with a longstanding history on the chain so there wouldn't be any rogue activity later on with the accounts to force people to re-create everything.
There's of course also threads on Leofinance but they operate with comments directly instead and viewed as tweets on their front-end, it doesn't necessarily get the same attention as the rest of the platforms as an authors post would.
Either way, just some thoughts on the blocks. Might get into working on that idea at some point unless someone beats me to it, but until then I think the devs involved with POSH and OCD are quite busy at this point to consider something like this. Maybe my followers like it though so looking forward to reading some comments about it!
