The first month of steemit passed with a sense of underwhelming optimism, as I tried to understand the community and the people who dared to dream of a better social media. I dived in and trekked through some of the more commonly explored areas, not sure where I would be able to stake a claim on a pristine patch that I could call my own niche. Yet in the background, the platform struggled under the burden of a fast growing population (and economy), it seemed inevitable that something would give and buckle under the weight of expectations. But then Steemfest 2 brought a renewed sense of hope to those that have been seeking answers and finding echoes of their own questions...
In the second month of steemit I slowly began to understand that this platform is not free from the problems that plagued other social media platforms, but there were definitely plenty of people willing to put their hand up to plug the gaps where needed, roll their sleeves and put in the effort to rebuild after disaster struck. As I began to feel more confident about what it is that I want to bring to the community, I also sense that one of the key focus for the platform moving forward would be on the issue of quality. That we as a community have a need to promote quality people:
SP Delegate menu
https://steemit.com/voteselling/@stellabelle/dear-freedom-and-whales-here-s-a-sp-delegatee-menu-to-solve-the-vote-selling-problem
And we need more than ever to promote quality posts:
Smartsteem
https://steemit.com/steem/@smartsteem/smartsteem
Yet how can we measure what quality is on steemit? As the saying goes:
You can't improve what you don't measure
Simple as it may sound, on steemit I think it comes down to 3 factors, which I think is essential for anyone who wants to really contribute to a greater cause and help change lives for the better:
Perhaps you are not convinced, so I will try to make the link with the two initiatives that I mentioned earlier and also provide some other examples I have found outside of steemit. But firstly, I want to put it in the context of an ethical framework and suggest that this can only be possible if what we do is underpinned by the intention to value those attributes that make our actions conform to good ethical practices at different levels:
So not only do we build the platform on human rights, but we value human effort and strive to improve the human experience. And when we value human effort the experience will also improve. I think this is what will give rise to the quality that we want to improve. The SP Delegate menu elaborates on what some of those human efforts are, and highlight people who are:
So we know who some of these people are and what types of roles we value here on steemit. All these roles require human effort (I hope I don't have to explain why), but they measure output in terms of what is done and not how it is done, and this is where smartsteem attempts to get into some of the metrics that help us understand the types of activities/content we value and how they can further improve the experience on steemit. According to the introduction post, the smartscore compromises of measures in:
But again we come across that magic word quality without a very solid definition of what it is. There are some things that we can definitely measure objectively, such as the uniqueness of the post in terms of the topics covered and the tags associated with it, but some things are not so easy to describe. Whether this is due to a current lack of support for this on the platform or the fact that we don't measure these things (but they are recorded on the blockchain) I am not so sure, but I think a holistic picture of quality not just in terms of the post will help make sense of this better.
Let's not think of quality as a destination. There is no point at which we can easily define what it is, unlike the objects or reactions used to define the SI units for weight or time or something that we can all agree on. And by not looking at quality as an end point but a trend it helps us to realize the power of metrics not as a tool to make judgments but to provide a point of reference. For example, if you only judged a user account by their current reputation, you will clearly fail to see that the person might actually be producing quality posts that will increase their reputation, or the rogue account that has gained a good reputation but is now engaged in less than reputable activities. So let's not measure quality by individual posts alone but how that person is realizing their own potential to contribute meaningful posts.
But what we do need is to relate the Who, What and How to a post to fully appreciate what quality is. For example, two different people with different reputation could come up with the same idea separately and so judging quality on Who alone when one person might be more experienced, has a higher reputation or takes more time to produce the same content could be misleading. Also, if we simply tried to use measures like upvotes and comments to measure quality then content that is easier to digest and understand will be valued more highly (zapps, memes and videos, etc.) so what is produced in a post and the result in terms of upvotes and comments still isn't enough. Similarly, if we simply looked at the content without knowing whether it was original or plagiarized material then we would still be way off the mark so how the work is produced is also important.
Hopefully by now you have some sense of the enormity of the problem of measuring quality. And yes I did promise you a 'simpler' way to do this by looking at empathy, curiosity and humility, so how can we apply some practical wisdom to make it work? This is where I think combining the collective intelligence and power of human analysis with the power of computer processing will help take us a step in the right direction. What if instead of simply upvoting (which I think is very scary because it is just like a facebook 'Like'/'Thumbs Up'/'Reaction) we expressed our thoughts on the post in terms of the three factors I mentioned earlier?
Empathy: is the content something that comes from the heart of the steemian? Does it relate to what they are passionate about and is this for the people who are also passionate about the same thing? Is it something that seeks to benefit not just an individual but a whole group or community? If it makes you feel something inside and want to do something as well, not just to click to upvote then move on, but to comment on it and make you write your own post. If it is something that adds to the collective spirit of compassion and sharing that many steemians have already demonstrated then I think it is on the right track.
Curiosity: is the content something that makes you think, ask questions or want to find out more? Is it 'original' and innovative, ground-breaking or challenge your beliefs, correct your misconceptions or trigger new ways of thinking? If it makes you wonder if you can do better, whether we can do better, and adds to the collective intelligence or wisdom then I think we are on the right track.
Humility: is the content something that seeks to promote people who are more skilled, talented or hard working than we are? Is it advocate for self-improvement and introspection or to acknowledge the efforts of people who have made a real difference with their contribution?
I don't think every post will serve all these purposes, but I think it is not a question that we need feedback on a scale of 1-10. It is something that as individuals we will see or not see, and as a community we can collectively decide whether it is something that meets one or all of those criteria for the community.
What do you think is a good measure of quality on steemit?
Please comment below and also feel free to provide feedback to the wonderful people that are helping to monitor and improve the quality of content here on steemit.
I hope that 
