Thank you for sharing this needed post with us!
I am sure it will be an eye-opener for many. I myself had an encounter yesterday with the author you highlighted in your post.
I can understand why Steemians use AI. As @ngoenyi put it the other day in reply to Steemians who are unhappy about the winners that got chosen, it is out of pure desperation. She is not wrong. It is also what drives them to use AI.
I myself cannot complete with a user that writes over 100, let alone 200, comments. It is just impossible! Okay, it's possible if I use AI as time I don't have.
I feel for those who write those 100 comments without AI, who's then not nominated as winners.
After reading your post, I now understand why the engagement in our contests (Steem For Ladies) in the last season was not as high as in some of the other communities.
We made it pretty clear in our posts that quality of the post and engagement go hand in hand and NOT most engaged, plus we gave clear reasons why the winners were chosen. I had a look, and the average top comments were around 50.
We must not forget the purpose of the program, which is to create engagement.
For me, true engagement comes from the Steemian, who writes at least 30 comments. This was also how we determined our winners. If you can give 30 unique, quality comments, you are a contender. Next, the quality of your post will be taken into consideration and following ALL the rules.
Lastly,
Software can tell you how many comments a user has made, but it can't tell you if those comments are eligible.
The existing tools we use also don't tell us how many comments were made on a specific post. We had a user who had close to 100 comments. After investigating, it was discovered that she submitted three posts in the community in that specific week, and her engagement with her fellow Steemians was on various posts.
She did a wonderful job engaging, but not as far as the challenge goes.
I do believe a slight change in the rule will result in less unhappiness, more engagement, fairness, and, for sure, better quality of posts.
Setting reasonable benchmarks like that will definitely mitigate this comment spamming issue.
Lol your reply was really funny to that guy, that's why I really like you, you are quick to caution bad stuff. Meanwhile I get your reason for your comment, but I want to remind you something that triggered the innovation of steem engagement.
Sincerely before the engagement challenge many users including me, rarely drops comment and reply others comment, so therefore the drive of engagement was mostly gotten from posts of users.
Due to this the team started the engagement challenge to help improve the engagement on the platform. Also leaving the winners selection to just the mod and admins, makes it very easy to generate rigged results. But if quality and ai-free comment gets 70% criteria to become a winner of a contest, then it would be very difficult to rig the election of winners.
Despite how hard the steemit team tries to improve the decentralization of the blockchain, some communities are making their communities centralized, because of selfish and greedy desires.
Finally I don't support a user scoring low in post quality but using comment as leavage or reason to win but from my observations most people complaining scored 9.5 or 10 by the moderators of these communities. So how do want to explain to someone an mod scored 10 or 9.5 that his post is of low quality? Or are you people say this mod grade wrongly?.
I want to ask why would an engagement challenge be won without engaging immensely? I also believe the engagement should be modified and stated clearly, because I don't know why the rules of each community running the engagement challenge be different.
For example I saw a community refusing a winner his post because the winner won on another community, this shouldn't happen because it would make people focus on only one community, instead of participating in all communities they can handle and it also counter steemblog statement
Better still, the reason why engagement are won should be stated in the report just as it was done before. For example the number of comments, reply and score should also be added to the report.
I wish I had all the answers to your questions, but I don't.
As for discriminating against winners because they already received a vote from the Steemit Team or because they were chosen by another community, that is wrong and so sad. The best authors regarding quality of post and showing successful engagement should win, and those who need help should be helped.
Lastly, regarding that comment of mine, I know where you come from. We have a name for it in my home language, "blinde sambok" "One way or another, sooner or later, you will be punished for your sins."
Now, I close my comment, as I am supposed to have a few days off with my family. (•ิ‿•ิ)
What was so funny about it?
My good friend 😂😆😆, your question is very much funnier
I don't think you've read this part of my post.
man you must be a comedian. If don't like my comment, please delete it.
You see the problem, steemit is free blockchain platform. Where everyone can share their opinion, so don't know why you are worrying yourself about it
Moreover the comment was to my very old and my very respected friend @patjewell, who I know I wasn't abusive and negative on my comment.
Although I liked your post and I would support in every way to stop ai comment.thank you my friend.
Is it engagement if 30 comments are written to different people and after that the engagement stops? 🤔
This is based on an engagement challenge, the contest of the week, from a specific community.
It is also unique engagements therefor not a comment on a comment. It will thus be comments to different people.
Comments will also not stop at 30. We still take in account the number of comments plus the quality thereof and the quality of the posts.
I try to understand what you explain...
Just leaving a comment and never return doesn't sound like engaging to me but I can be mistaken.
I wish there was an option to block these people.
Let's just help them where we can. (•ิ‿•ิ)