Creativity Challenge #5: A goat, a mirror, and a car

remlaps-lite (76)in #games • 2 years ago

Here is a photo from Christel SAGNIEZ at Pixabay:

Your challenge is to post a reply with:

A story in five words, a limerick, or a haiku that's based on this photo; -OR-
A meme or inspirational photo that's constructed from the image (The Pixabay license permits modification.); -OR-
Some other sort of short, creative, reply that's inspired by the photo;

Also

Vote on your favorite replies to help me curate the display order of the responses.

Here's my entry - a rispetto:

Some might say that a goat is there on the car
Others would note the car is under a goat
On top or beneath, the car won't get too far
When a goat on the hood the car still must tote

Evicting a goat from its perch on the hood
Should never be done with a stout piece of wood
Remove it instead with a nice tempting snack
A treat is preferred to a haphazard whack

Your turn. ; -)

Enjoy!

^{Pixabay license, source}

Reminder

Visit the /promoted page and #burnsteem25 to support the inflation-fighters who are helping to enable decentralized regulation of Steem token supply growth.

#poetry #creativity #burnsteem25 #penny4thoughts

2 years ago in #games by remlaps-lite (76)

$23.49

Sort:

Trending

[-]

chriddi (73) 2 years ago

$0.25

6 votes

[-]

moecki (71) 2 years ago

$0.24

5 votes

[-]

chriddi (73) 2 years ago

Off Topic

Hello @remlaps,
I would like to reactivate our popular community SCRABBLE soon with the community account @deutschunplugged. To simplify the quite complex orga, I would like to do without direct Steem distributions, instead - if possible - use #penny4thoughts.
As I once understood, there is an automated algorithm behind it, right?
I set @penny4thoughts as the beneficiary, after the contest post is paid out, it distributes its earnings to the commenters. Their profit is based on a percentage of the amount of the comment votes that I will have distributed with @deutschunplugged. Did I understand that correctly? Is there anything else I need to consider?
Thank you very much,
Chriddi

$0.23

5 votes

[-]

remlaps (74) 2 years ago

Hi, that's basically right. If you set @penny4thoughts as beneficiary, it should work as follows:

@penny4thoughts upvotes and resteems the post
For 30 days, @penny4thoughts will follow the author's upvote on any replies to the post that get an upvote (from the original author) of 25% or higher. (The @penny4thoughts voting percentage varies, according to the beneficiary percentage and the author's voting percentage)
At payout time, all liquid rewards (SBD and/or STEEM, not SP) get distributed to the authors of replies who received 25% or higher upvotes from the author.

Notes:

@penny4thoughts keeps the SP and powers down a small percentage weekly
The beneficiary reward distribution is just split evenly among all reply-authors who receive >=25% upvotes from the original author. It doesn't matter if an account gets multiple upvotes on multiple replies, and as long as it's 25% or above, it doesn't matter what the percentage is. The account still just gets counted as "1" when the rewards are divided.
If there's a rounding error when dividing the rewards, @penny4thoughts keeps the extra fraction.
There is no minimum beneficiary setting.

This is a hobby project and was originally developed for my own use, so errors are possible. Hopefully not, but please let me know if anything goes awry.

$0.33

4 votes

[-]

chriddi (73) 2 years ago

Thank you very much for your detailed explanation!

Okay, actually I need a way to reward the player with the best score the highest. But I could also do that using the votes from my private account (this one). Would have to be the participants just a little more modest. But that might even be a good thing, because after all we propagate in our community that not the rewards, but the interaction should be in the foreground when you post with us.

Well, with that in mind, I'll have to talk to my team before I use #penny4thoughts.
@moecki, what do you think? Should we just give the tool a try?!

$0.23

5 votes

[-]

moecki (71) 2 years ago

Hm, I've thought about it.

The beneficiary reward distribution is just split evenly among all reply-authors who receive >=25% upvotes from the original author

As you said, this means that everyone gets the same share. I checked it with my last " payout" just to be sure. :-) So there would be no reward by points possible. From my point of view, that wouldn't be too bad, it might even draw more focus on "nice" words.
We then just have to be careful that only valid words are voted by the DU account with more than 25 %.

Maybe we could even - to highlight the importance of the community account - reward only with the community account. However, the DU account would then only be allowed to vote after the closing date.

In any case, it would be a simplification at the end of the round and I think it would be a good idea to try it out :-)

Wie du schon gesagt hast, bedeutet dies, dass alle den selben Anteil erhalten. Ich habe es zur Sicherheit bei meiner letzten "Ausschüttung" geprüft. :-) Es wäre also keine Belohnung nach Punkten möglich. Aus meiner Sicht wäre das nicht weiter schlimm, es würde vielleicht sogar mehr den Fokus auf "schöne" Wörter lenken.
Wir müssen dann nur aufpassen, dass nur gültige Wörter mit mehr als 25 % durch den DU-Account gevotet werden.

Vielleicht könnten wir sogar - um die Bedeutung des Community-Accounts hervorzuheben - nur mit dem Community-Account belohnen. Allerdings dürfte der DU-Account dann aber erst nach Einsendeschluss voten.

Auf jeden Fall wäre es eine Erleichterung beim Rundenabschluss und ich hätte nichts dagegen, es mal auszuprobieren :-)

$0.26

5 votes

[-]

chriddi (73) 2 years ago

Jepp, so machen wir's - einfach mal ausprobieren!

Allerdings dürfte der DU-Account dann aber erst nach Einsendeschluss voten

Nö. Ein Vote (> oder < 25%, je nach Gültigkeit eben) kann doch schon abgegeben werden, sobald ein eingereichtes Wort vom Schiri abgesegnet bzw. verbannt wurde. Dann muss penny4thoughts auch nicht alles am Stück voten. Oder liegt da jetzt bei mir ein Denkfehler vor?

Vielleicht könnten wir sogar - um die Bedeutung des Community-Accounts hervorzuheben - nur mit dem Community-Account belohnen

Ginge dann nicht ein bisschen das gegenseitige Voten verloren?

Ach, mal abwarten. Erstmal ausprobieren.
Ich werde die Tage eine Vorankündigung mit diversen Regeländerungen veröffentlichen. Mal schauen, ob dann außen den ganz hartgesottenen Stammis überhaupt noch jemand mitspielt... ;-D

$0.07

1 vote

[-]

moecki (71) 2 years ago

Oder liegt da jetzt bei mir ein Denkfehler vor?

Ebenfalls nö ;-) Da war der Denkfehler auf meiner Seite.
Du hast recht, Abwarten ist gar nicht notwendig. Hab mich wahrscheinlich von der bisherigen Verfahrensweise verleiten lassen.

Ginge dann nicht ein bisschen das gegenseitige Voten verloren?

Ich meinte eher, dass du nicht wie bisher zusätzlich mit deinem privaten Account (als Spielbelohnung) votest.
Ich will keinem verbieten, von User zu User zu voten.

Bin gespannt, wie die neue Runde läuft... nach so langer Zeit...😀

$0.07

1 vote

[-]