To fully understand where I'm getting with this, I'd need to first make clear how one would use these properly - warning, both incentives would come from the author rewards which means authors would have to forfeit part of their rewards in order to incentivize and potentially improve manual curation on Hive.
There's 2 ways to go about improving the dreaded increase of auto votes/trail votes, etc, that every so often disregards the content and effort placed behind certain content by the authors that receive them. I myself am one of those authors too but every so often I try to make up for this by forfeiting some author rewards using the beneficiary system, not everyone does nor cares to do this, however.
1 of them would be to give more rewards to manual voters. On the blockchain level this change cannot happen because we can't tell manual vs auto voters apart. Sure right now it's easy to spot auto and trail votes but if they found out that manual votes are getting a higher return they'd become "smarter" to act like manual votes, i.e. not always landing right after everyone else and not always at a certain post age, etc.
The other way is to downvote posts you believe have a lot of autovoters/trail votes and at the same time you think the author is being overrewarded. This causes drama and a bad UX as they feel as though you're taking rewards from them.
Okay, so let's instead look at these other two projects and how they could potentially help without using any of the two methods above.
Reward.app - the main idea behind this project was not to just liquidate your author rewards even though that's 99.99% of how people have used it over the years. I.e. they want the HBD and Hive in liquid form rather than getting HBD and Hive Power that takes 13 weeks to unstake. As you can imagine this also causes some abuse, especially since the dev behind it has insisted over the years to upvote whoever uses it (not something I've been in favor, but since I haven't submitted any liquidity to it and my main usecase for it never got used I didn't have much say in how it's being ran).
The other idea, however, is that you can set how much of the author rewards you have going to reward.app would go back to the curators. I.e. you're forfeiting part of your author rewards to give additional rewards to the curators.
The way things are set up right now at the blockchain level, authors receive 50% of the vote value while curators receive the other 50%. Since @reward.app receives up to 100% of the author rewards, however, it can at the point of payout decide what it does with these author rewards, so if the author has set up their account to give 20% extra to curators, then anyone voting on that specific post is going to get 50% + 10% rewards compared to the regular 50%. Meaning they'll get an additional 20% of the 50% going to author rewards based on the strength of their vote, etc.
The idea behind this was to function a bit similar to "bid bots" but with the option to now easier downvote if this is done excessively or in an abusive way now that we have 25% downvote mana along our upvote mana.
Let's get right into the other project now which could work well in combination with reward.app to make manual curation more rewarding and hopefully shift more voting power towards that in the long run.
@commentrewarder works a bit similar to reward.app's idea of giving curators extra rewards, but here you would also have to place a comment under the post and the author would have to upvote it in turn of getting a piece of the shares that the author is sending to @commentrewarder through beneficiaries.
To give you an idea, let's use an example.
In this post I will set 10% to go to @reward.app and send @reward.app a memo saying 100, this 100% represents how much of that 10% I want to go back to curators from the author rewards of this post. At the same time I'll also send 10% beneficiaries to @commentrewarder which means that based on which comments I vote and for how much of my voting strength, it'll send an additional 10% of my author rewards to those commenters at payout.
This means that of the 50% of author rewards this post should receive, 20% or a total of 10% will go to voters and commenters or both. I.e. if someone comments and has also voted and I decide to vote their comment, they'll receive up to 20% of their vote value if not more from commentrewarder.
Okay, let's make this example a bit easier.
If these same beneficiaries are placed (10% reward.app (with 100% going to voters) + 10% commentrewarder) and the post ends up at a displayed value of $20, with $10 going to curators and $10 going to the author (me), and there's only 1 voter on my post (let's say @theycallmedan for instance) and he leaves a comment on the post of which I upvote and no other comment.
Then theycallmedan will receive $12 curation rewards while I receive $8 author rewards.
Alright so, while commentrewarder has a lot of other amazing usecases to make life for smaller users easier and try to encourage engagement on their posts and reward.app has a bit of a controversial usecase where we could potentially use it to encourage voters on our posts in exchange for getting more votes to promote a post on trending - I think that a mix and moderate use of them both could encourage manual votes to receive additional rewards which in turn could mean better curation overall.
Anyway, I'd be up for more discussions surrounding this as I find it quite interesting how things could evolve if this was used wider.
but thanks for reading for now, I'll try make a video about it some time soon too if it's easier to understand that way.
Image is AI generated.
I believe that one of the best projects we've had recently was the comment rewarder, because it's an extra incentive for engagement and interaction. In people's long posts, you leave a vote on the comment you want to reward, so you can choose the coolest comment and with that, it will receive a bit of the value set in the post.
For snaps, for example, which have the comment rewarder set very high and reward those snaps that have the most engagement, this makes us want to create better content every time to draw more attention and make people comment, bringing in more people and everything.
Of course, in any of these options, I don't support any unbridled spam, so it's always nice when people make the effort to leave a well-crafted comment/response.
Yeah commentrewarder is great for that, especially if the author distributes the extra rewards well. It would in many ways encourage people to spend their limited 10x max daily votes well if they thought that actually consuming the content and having something nice to comment about it would get them an extra % of the vote you just placed back.
At the same time the author could potentially receive more rewards even if they placed 10% to go to the comments because curators who don't care about commenting see the amount of engagement it's generating and want to reward that author more that day instead of what they usually would've voted. It's kind of a win-win-win situation if it ends up giving less rewards to other authors who may not get a lot of engagement or may not care about it.
I never used any of these tools, but what you write about @commentrewarder sounds interesting. I am not posting really often currently, but when I do next time I might think about it to give @commentrewarder a try. Noramlly I upvote all comments in my posts but using comment rewarder would mean to upvote them in a more conscious and selective way I guess ...
In my opinion there is another disadvantage for manual voters which could be fixed easily: I never understood why upvoting a post early is more beneficial than upvoting it late, because of course autovoters always vote within the time window of maximal curation rewards, but manual curators (should) take their time to seek, read and evaluate posts without being under time pressure to vote early (I personally don't care at all about when I upvote posts and comments, anyway).
Another bad side effect of the pressure to upvote early is that nearly nobody cares about posts anymore which are older than two days.
I personally would actually prefer if posts could be rewarded by upvotes forever instrad to have that seven day window, but probably that would fail due to technical reasons ...
I get a lot of auto-votes on my posts from accounts which no longer seem active. I like the votes, but I'd also like to know actual people read what I wrote. Boosting real engagement is great, but we also have problems with comment spammers who try to game the system with vague compliments to farm upvotes, too. I don't know what the solution is, but commentrewarder indicates both author and commenter engagement.
I suppose in the extreme cases where some are obviously farming commentrewarder and the authors are oblivious and continue giving them a vote and share, we could blacklist people with the tool - but not sure if that's even close to being such a problem that we'd consider that and even then if that's the right move.
Your comment is upvoted by @topcomment
Info - Support - Discord
Not all people know the importance of get good feedback in your blog, for this reason I am completely sure of uses it, this service
I do not know which people do not share their earn, with their audience.
When I see this services I was very happy with it, you could sure about it.
With reward app mmmmm I have never uses it, I prefer uses the normal service, because is good to see your account growing up, slowly but grown. @commentrewarder help us to be sure of how many people have been compromised with his audience, and let them to participate in their earn, I remembered in the past when I do not have voting power every people which come to my blog I send a tip, little but maybe in the future it could help.
Your comment is upvoted by @topcomment
Info - Support - Discord
For example, for me, $15 is quite a good payout for my posts. This will give me $7.50 author rewards. When I set the percentage of commentrewarder to 5% it will result in $0.38.
When I give 5 comments an upvote it will be $0.076 cents for each comment.
I don't think that will attract a lot of extra commenters for my posts.I really like the @commentrewarder initiative since it incentivizes people to comment more. Only, I don't really see how it would improve curation. Yes, you give away more of the author rewards, but I think this only helps when the author gets a lot of rewards.
I do like all initiatives that improve a better distribution of rewards and/or combat autovotes on overrewarded posts.
The thought process is basically this.
I see you set CR as beneficiary, let's say maybe a bit higher than 5%, I see it got a lot of extra comments (maybe cause of that) and that you curated them well. So now instead of giving you a vote I would've usually given you, 50% for instance, I'd decide to give you a 100% vote instead to make up for the 5-10% CR beneficiary and at the same time leave you a comment so you'd vote it. Now I'd get half of the rewards back from curation + a little extra cause I left you a comment, which mainly is only something manual curators can do. Of course not all manual curators would care to leave a comment for the extra rewards, but maybe they'd pay attention to the reward.app part as well.
So in the end, even if authors are spending 10-20% beneficiaries on CR and RA, they could potentially still make the same if not more author rewards because curators notice that author is sharing the rewards with curators and commenters compared to those not doing so at all and vote them higher than they would have.
In terms of reward pool this of course doesn't change much if autovoters keep autovoting like usual, but maybe manual voters would target their votes a bit better than they would have in the past and maybe it could encourage some users to trail the manual voters rather or autovoters would start updating their votes more often or even change to manual, who knows. Either way, if manual voters start earning a bit higher APR because of this it's a win in the long run.
I was actually just wondering if reward.app could take partial beneficiary percentages. This post answers that question which is nice.
I'd actually forgotten that I was meant to be using reward.app for it's proper usage, rewarding curators more, likely because vimm did supported it but dagamers currently does not.
I've actually just dropped them a suggestion to make it possible to add custom beneficiaries.
When/if it does get supported I'll likely do the same, set reward.app to 100% and just throw some extra towards curators and commenters.
I'm a hive witness supporting the blockchain please consider voting for me! - Find out more here!
When I got rewarded I was so happy I actually made the comment. The downside is that it depends on authors being willing to sacrifice some rewards. Not sure how many would actually do that, but if enough people tried, it could shift things a bit. Nice initiativeThis is actually a pretty interesting idea. Using @reward.app and @commentrewarder to boost manual curation could make things fairer and encourage more real engagement.
oh finally a proper and understandable post on how they work, i never understood how reward.app work, i just saw in my wallet sometimes things arriving from it
i just don't get how reward.app can encourage more manual vote, i meam reward.app encourages the votes on your post because who upvotes it pontentially earns more, so once a user starts to use it always, it will attract more autovotes of people wanting the extra reward
am i missing something?
It's because the default setting is to give curators 4% of the beneficiaries, so you some times may see some dust rewards coming if you've voted people using the service who mostly just use it to liquidate rewards.
Yeah, the idea is that similar to autovotes now, if you see authors using that to encourage more autovotes then you can downvote that as well. Autovotes however don't change as often as manual votes can on a daily basis from author to author, people usually set and forget them for a long time.
Thank you for talking about commentrewarder . I just used it for two times, and frankly I felt like I didn't got the real idea behind it. Your post made a little bit more clear about the potencial use of this two different systems. I'm looking forward to see your video about it 😅
Yeah maybe I can go in depth about commentrewarder in there to make it clear the best usecases for smaller authors and then this one.
It's good that you tried to clarify to people and try to do it more clear how it works. Also I think for some users it may be good if it'll be possible to visualize how this services work with formulas. But I understand that it can to take more time to prepare content for it ...
Hardly anybody is using the reward.app in the way you have specified, therefore I am a bit sceptic. It is just used as a tool to avoid staking Hive and increases the KP value. So if at all, I vote liquifying posts less than others also because how to know if that "100" memo was sent? Too hard to figure out.
Yeah same here, at some point I'd also overlook how people used it knowing they were farming some autovotes from the project itself but don't really have the time to do abuse-fighting in that place anymore.
It is indeed hard to figure that part out unless the author specifically mentions it and if you then believe them or bother checking their transactions setting that option. Maybe front-ends could have a solution for that that would show the % amount going to curators in the "reward.app" icon on @peakd for instance but even that seems a bit difficult to do potentially.
This project is indeed amazing. Using it will appreciate those that make a comment. I love the project. Thanks for the update
This two services can be use for the betterment of hive. If we talk about commentrewarder, it's a good opportunity to use it for the betterment of hive. Like, if the users use it, then other hivers will encourage for making a comment. This will be very good for the engagement of hive. Thanks for sharing your opinions with us.
I used reward app before but I didn't increase comment rewards. It's not available in other front ends like ecency so I'm not using it anymore.
I think @commentrewarder has been very useful for smaller users like us who don't have big HP to upvote, but am able to garner some meaningful upvotes through writing content. So really thankful for that.
I never use reward.app because I don't care to have liquid Hive and HBD because I am 100% focused on increasing my Hive Power.
I have always looked negatively at using reward.app because most of the time it is used to liquidate and take out HIVE and when I see a post with reward.app I generally don't vote for it.
After reading your post I realized that reward.app can also be used in the right way and from now on I will try to make a distinction before deciding whether or not to vote for a post with reward.app, so thank you for this post of yours
Comment rewarder, on the other hand, is a tool that I really like and has no downside because it incentivizes manual interaction. I used it once in one of my posts and will try to use it more in the future especially when writing tutorials.
Certainly the CR tool is fantastic for being the support that is available to any user who shows cordiality with the authors of publications and other content creators.
It is currently growing in fame as a win-win for publishers and commentators, and is great as an incentive for cooperation within the blockchain.
It is a tool that provides many benefits to its beneficiaries, such as meeting new users, reading posts with a lot of intellectual material that deserves appreciation, and fostering creativity among communities.
I heard of commentrewarder, but I never knew that it was possible to explore this mechanism that will encourage curator to visit an article and earn an extra value for the engagement in the comment section.
Wow...
Thanks!
Commentrewarder is excellent project
Hi @acidyo I love the idea. I get it.
This is how I see it in your post.
Comment reward: 10%
Reward.app: 10%
It's interesting and could help promote more engagement on posts.
1+ they don't understand it.
2+ and others struggle with giving rewards.I'd like to see that video and see if it's easier to understand. Many people still don't use @commebtrewarder because:
But we should think about promoting engagement on our posts in addition to rewards. That's what I think. I like to have lots of comments on my posts.
@acidyo, I paid out 21.626 HIVE and 0.000 HBD to reward 11 comments in this discussion thread.
As the first post I have read on your account, @acidyo, thank you for writing this detailed post. As I am new to participating on the Hive blockchain, one of my early decisions was to encourage interactions with others via the use of both of these.
I think I was not fully clear on how @reward.app actually works. This post helped clear that up a bit, although I think I will still have to experience it more to be certain of that.
Overall, I appreciate the focus on improving what you call curation. Without any genuine, meaningful, thoughtful comments on our posts, I do not personally think the Hive blockchain achieves its potential.
❤️❤️