Resuming the Trail

It brings me pleasure to announce that the curation trail has been resumed.

With the POBLeus project underway and dynamics changing on the platform, it seems like the perfect time to start spreading those rewards out again.

_{image courtesy - Luis Quintero}

The decision has been made for several reasons; some are obvious, while others are not. Fortunately, I'm going to lay them all out with complete transparency with no worries for who I'll upset.

_{Seriously though, if something bothers you, just tag my username and discuss it with me. Open communication is appreciated and productive. Deviously cryptic publications with complaints suck ass.}

I'm content with my voting habits lately. I upvote people who are consistent and demonstrate an understanding behind Proof Of Brain. Of course, integrity and intelligence play a significant role in this; personality goes a long way too.
After reading @onealfa's post about @richardcrill, I noticed that some more assistance could help spread his vote further. He has been following my curation trail at 75% for a while now, so I am assuming he trusts in my vote. Happy to help.
Since POBLeus is now rolling and other curators have started assisting with a 10% curation trail follow from @proofofbrainio, it makes sense for me to continue learning about what curation trail voting involves.
If I can help others stay motivated on the platform with deserved upvotes, even when fear of missing out on rewards presents itself, I'll be a happy man.
I've thought about the limited viewpoints that some people have regarding reward distribution from larger stakeholders. I'm aware that complaints about distribution will always happen within this system as it stands. This doesn't bother me anymore; here is the microscope. If you don't like my methods, reach out and help me understand why.

To further elaborate on point two;

Over the past two weeks, I've been dropping 100% upvotes around 90% of the time (rough guess). This isn't ideal, and I'll be adjusting this to factor in the curation trail follows. However, my voting habits will still be focused on creators of the platform who demonstrate the qualities mentioned.

It's not a cookie-cutter process as we're all complex beings within our own right. Multiple factors are considered by me, including but not limited to;

Staking/dumping activity
Quality of content/interactions (does it bring a net positive value to the platform?)
Big versus small picture thinker
Defining characteristics: Humility, Authenticity, Honesty, Integrity, Generosity

I like to look at Proof Of Brain voting with a broad scope. One article of content can't define a person and it can't speak for all their actions. So my votes are sometimes distributed taking this into account. Quality is the priority so that the PoB mechanics are encouraged. Still, some anomalies can factor into the decided vote weight.

For instance, someone posts consistently good content four times a week, which is noticed, but I only vote on two of their posts at a higher vote weight, even though they're not at the same level of quality as the others. This doesn't mean I didn't find value in the other two posts. They may have been missed, vote focus may have been on a wider audience at the time. Time and attention are limited.

I act on intuition and some rudimentary metrics for voting in general. Grading in the WOTW is more developed but not necessarily used in conjunction with my vote.

I've recently been finding high-quality posts within the #link-drop channel of the POBLeus discord that aren't posted directly to the community. This has changed my stance on voting solely within the community tag.

These posts are from other curators who actively look for the top end content posted for #proofofbrain. Upvotes to this calibre of content are necessary since it's the quality that I'm sure we'd all like to see on the platform. Stake/dump activity and other factors still play a part on some level over time.

As you can see, there are grey areas when it comes to responsibly curating with the long-term success of the platform on your mind.

_{image courtesy - Valery Fedotov}

There are currently six active curators (including myself) for the POBLeus curation effort: @nevies, @ashleykalila, @scholaris, @thomashnblum, @clixmoney. All of their curation trails are followed by @proofofbrainio at 10% with a 24-hour delay, except @clixmoney, a guest curator for the project with access to the #link-drop channel.

The testing phase is underway; we're working out the issues as we go. There is more information here about the project and more frequent updates on the discord during testing. On-chain information and community-backed nominations, including detailed statistics for curatorship, are to come. Join the discussion; the more, the merrier.

_{I'd also like to nominate two more accounts to assist with the testing phase as @dibblers.dabs and @clixmoney are no longer curating for the project with the curation trail attached. 100% manual voting is a requirement for anyone joining the efforts.}

Alright, time to slip out of the formal persona. I always seem to mould into that when I get talking about curation and responsibility on the platform.

Even during the more serious settings, the time here is enjoyable for me (learning about the range of brains in this environment is never dull). However, there is a time and place for everything, and we shouldn't forget that this should be a fun experience (otherwise, what's the point?).

Taking on too much responsibility isn't for everyone. It can quickly become burdensome and stressful. I'll be sure to let the community know if it is too much for me; I hope others who take on important roles can do the same.

Any concerns, you know what to do (and I don't mean fuck off... comment below).

_{^{100% @pob-fund beneficiary set. pob-fund friday, remember that?}}