Rewards for republished content should be brought back.

Service: Narrative

Currently, the platform is not a nice showcase for quality authors. Nor has fully functional tools. Spending hours on original content that is quickly flushed away from the shot of a lunch supported by voting circles is not fun.

Canceling rewards for republished content may mean removing one the few reasons for quality authors to be here in this early period.

Full rewards may not be fair, I agree. A reduction of rewards for reposting could be introduced. But zeroing them is excessive, IMO.

I get that the measure has been introduced for fighting plagiarism. But the scarcity of quality content is a much greater problem, and plagiarism can also be fought, at least in part, in other ways.

As side notes on plagiarism: Reputation - when correctly implemented - will certainly help, if it will have an impact on exposure and rewards. And, personally, I'd reverse the need to prove ownership. If the republished content is yours, let this be crystal clear. Else, it's out. Drastic measure in real life, but perfectly reasonable online, where abuses covered by anonymity are so much easier.

Original Post

Activity Stream

I agree. Plagiarists won't use canonical links period, so the platform is just shooing away quality content. I'd prefer content that is already  released in other platforms over the instagram feed I see now, artificially inflated by the voting circles.

Some plagiarists are using canonical links. I've seen it. However, the percentage of plagiarists using canonical links to real quality content producers using them is probably quite low. I think metrics would show that. And I believe they would also reveal that the percentage of plagiarists not using canonical links to those who are is probably high. So I see the point @Vico Biscotti is making. The unintended consequence is going to be less content from those who are producing quality content.

There's also another aspect of this that was brought up on Steemit. Someone posted that Steemit is now adding canonical links to all posts so that any content posted elsewhere means that the Steemit version will be the one indexed. I ran a test on a few of my back posts and found this inconclusive. In some cases, my Steemit article was ranked. In other cases, content posted to web properties I own was ranked. The ratio was 6 for Steemit and 4 for my own properties. It was a small test and that's why I say inconclusive.

Here's the kicker: In the cases I tested where an article was first published on Narrative, Google did not rank any of those above the Steemit version. This, despite that I always include my own rel=canonical links at the bottom of those posts indicating where an article was first published.

What's this mean? It's entirely possible that even if articles are published first on Narrative and then republished elsewhere, that domain authority and age will take precedence. None of us have control over Google algorithms; only Google has that. Therefore, they can override their own policies--and those policies may be misunderstood anyway.

Bottom line: The canonical link tag is just a suggestion. Google is going to rank the web page it deems is most helpful for searchers. Narrative does not yet have the domain clout that Steemit has, and there are a fair number of Steemians and former Steemians on Narrative. Steemit's Hardfork 22 greatly improved the rewards payout expectations for serious content creators on Steemit, which makes it more competitive than it was on Narrative's beta launch. So this is a critical time for Narrative to ensure that it can retain quality content creators. While I applaud the efforts to fight plagiarism, I think Vico's point that anything that discourages quality content creators from re-posting on Narrative from other platforms might actually backfire and work against Narrative's interests. Later on, probably not..

@Vico Biscotti  Agree there are other ways to fight plagiarism and we have several plans to do this - yes, improvements to reputation are one way.   As @Garden Gnome Publications stated, plagiarists were using canonical links quite frequently. In fact, often times they are  linking to the articles published on other platforms that they published on -- but those were  stolen originally from somewhere else.   A long web of plagiarism to decouple.  

My hope is that new writers will come - maybe post some "older but still relevant" content with Canonical Links  to get fresh eyes and perspective on their posts..and also contribute original content that they can earn rewards (if they want).  We will keep watching and learning - and pivot when we need to.  

I'm with @Vico Biscotti - I was very upset with the new ruling to give no rewards to content posted elsewhere first.  Plagiarists don't play by the rules to begin with, so they will simply not included the canonical link.  I have a lot of MY OWN ORIGINAL WORK that I would like to share with Narrative that I posted elsewhere first.  I have many good content posts (in my opinion) that I posted on both Steem and Medium that got almost no notice because I had no following at the time.  And Steem does not pay out after 7 days so that content is lost.  Why shouldn't I be able to share my own work here and expect to have earnings from it?  Narrative doesn't yet have the popularity or the following (or rewards!) to require exclusive original content, in my opinion.  This is another case of shooting yourself in the foot, I think.  I'd much rather see quality content that someone has posted in another arena, than another hundred instagram posts.  Please reconsider your decision, at least until Narrative is on a footing to be able to actually reward quality posts.

MOLLY O posted:

@Vico Biscotti  Agree there are other ways to fight plagiarism and we have several plans to do this - yes, improvements to reputation are one way.   As @Garden Gnome Publications stated, plagiarists were using canonical links quite frequently. In fact, often times they are  linking to the articles published on other platforms that they published on -- but those were  stolen originally from somewhere else.   A long web of plagiarism to decouple.  

My hope is that new writers will come - maybe post some "older but still relevant" content with Canonical Links  to get fresh eyes and perspective on their posts..and also contribute original content that they can earn rewards (if they want).  We will keep watching and learning - and pivot when we need to.  

I echo @Vico Biscotti and @blueeyes8960 as a content creator. I was never able to make monetization work on my blog, and one of the things that sold me on joining Narrative was that I could re-purpose my old posts - some of which require a lot of editing to update, others not so much. 

I get that you need a way to crack down on plagiarism and make it easier to penalize, and I even get that you may not want to reward republished content at the same rate as original content, but there should be some middle ground. 

I recently published two gigantic new posts about accessibility at TwitchCon, the event I attended last weekend in San Diego. It took me over a day to write up each one, because my disabilities make mental and physical recovery after anything out of the norm, and writing takes a lot more energy for me than it used to. In that same time, I could have posted ALL of the photos I took at TwitchCon, even the ones that didn't make it to Instagram, and written up a quick paragraph to describe each as a separate post. They would have been simpler to consume and vote on, and my rewards would be exponentially higher. But I wouldn't have written the important things that were read by the man who's taking over as head of accessibility for Twitch - which is huge for potential impact on next year's convention.

Last month, I would have chosen to republish a few of my old blog posts (I have some saved as drafts) with their canonical links in order to make up for not being able to post more original content. This month, I don't have the energy to rewrite as much as I should rewrite even a single post in order to make it quanitifiably different from the original.

I've gotten 6 votes (total) on Part 1 about accessibility and 3 votes on Part 2, which took a lot more effort to write. The financial incentive here is not in my favor, which feels like injustice because of how much effort goes into crafting anything I write on here or have previously written and would like to re-publish.

I have thousands of blog posts on my blog. Only dozens will likely be worth re-publishing at all, although maybe it could be a couple hundred once I have time to finish looking through my archives. (I haven't bothered to continue scanning my archives since preparing content for the Beta launch.) But I now have zero incentive to make that content available on Narrative until I can spare an equivalent amount of time and energy UPDATING a post as I originally spent WRITING it.

There are some niches that could really benefit from having more content just so people know they're there, but those of us who have content that would fit into some of those less popular niches no longer have the incentive to help those niche owners out. In fact, it would hardly be worth it to those niche owners if the content isn't eligible for rewards. Re-published content for long-tail niches is ESSENTIAL for their survival, and an unintended consequence of the no-rewards-for-republished-content rule could be that you lose a LOT of niche owners when it comes time to renew because they can't justify the cost of renewal.

Unfortunately this just further shows how little control we users have over content moderation and this particular decision took even more of that power from us...

Narrative is still fully centralized and we are beholden to staff's structuring, which they can change at will.

I wish that any reference to decentralization would be deleted from the documentation!

@MOLLY O

@MOLLY O - I initially felt the policy shift was a good development, but I now believe we can't pivot away from it fast enough.

The following platform post explains in detail how hoping quality content creators will crosspost here merely for exposure isn't realistic.

https://www.narrative.org/post...-policy-gone-too-far

Because the platform already is suffering from insufficient incentives for quality content, I don't think we can afford to wait and see if everything works out with this policy shift.  

Also, to put things in perspective, although plagiarism does siphon away some NRVE every month, low quality original content siphons away much more.  

I agree with @Vico Biscotti, we can deal with plagiarism in other ways.  The biggest problem Narrative must tackle is how to make sure quality content receives more NRVE, not less.

I initially was supportive of this policy, as well. After reading Cheah Kit Sun's well-written and well-thought out post on the topic, I'll have to agree that it's time to rethink this. Cheah is one of the most prodigious content posters in the Speculative Fiction niche. He is consistent, diligent, and disciplined, and his content rocks! Yes, it's previously published. But it rocks. I'd much rather see previously published content that rocks than original fluff that barely floats. 

I came over here at @Garden Gnome Publications suggestion and I am completely in agreement with the sentiments expressed by @Vico Biscotti and @blueeyes8960, as well as  Cheah Kit Sun's cogent and arguments regarding rewards for republished content.

I am aware that I'm repeating myself, but here goes, and this was my gut reaction before reading Cheah's post:

I have had my own WP blog for quite a while and share that content across various platforms and social media - each of which has different audiences. While I'm the first to say that I don't stay on platforms for the return, I'm definitely not going to stay if I feel that my content is being exploited.  Frankly, and where I'm at, on this platform, there is no real benefit (or incentive) to me of putting original content on Narrative first and then on to the other platforms. Doing this increases the quantity of work I do and takes away the enjoyment.  All of this begs the question as to why I should stick around.

 

 

It was a good step to boost original contents on Narrative but also a big hurdle for many who are experienced bloggers and wanted to repost their evergreen contents on Narrative. Now we will miss that. I remembered when I had a chat with @Michael Farris about his #NRVEWorthy initiative. I can recall his words for approaching Medium writers with this, "Just repost and run, nothing to risk".

I agree with @Vico Biscotti here, if not full then atleast 50 to 70% Rewards for reposting should be there. 

@MOLLY O said: My hope is that new writers will come -
maybe post some "older but still relevant" content with
Canonical Links to get fresh eyes and perspective on
their posts..and also contribute original content that
they can earn rewards (if they want). We will keep
watching and learning - and pivot when we need to.

I also agree that this position needs to be thought out again.  Pivoting is a fantastic idea here, and quickly. I am a new writer who came, recently, and provided some unique new content to your platform. my mix was roughly 50/50 new and existing.

I have other pre-written content that would make sense here. This audience has never seen the content. It is not original on the entire Internet, but it is new to your audience. I no longer have any incentive to post it here.

If I need to find a way to monetize the content via narrative, I can choose to tease it here, and send the traffic to my own site, or to Medium, and monetize it that way. This would be similar to my use of Tumblr and Social Media platforms and DApps.

This will have the effect of siphoning viewing eyes from your platform, to my other platforms, if they decide to read my content that is hosted at other locations. It does nothing to build up the quality of content on your platform, unfortunately.

My goal in posting here was to be a part of a future platform that has growth potential.

If I have to rely on only new content here, then I will probably submit about half as many articles as I am capable of submitting. Which will likely tilt the scales in favor of me simply moving 100% of my efforts back to Medium, and simply work on growing my audience there. 

By the way, I reposted my original articles from here, to Medium, who curated them, and paid more for the articles than the originals posted here. I placed canonical links as appropriate, and if you search the articles, the Medium site comes up, not the Narrative site, despite the correct canonical links being placed at the time of publication.

The articles continue to pay week after week (On Medium). It remains to be seen if they will have any legs here, I have to wait until some time in November to find out.

If Narrative wants the privilege of my content for their eyeballs, then there needs to be a reward for it. If there is no reward, there is no point of posting here, over a blog, or a fiat currency paying site (medium) where it is exceedingly easier to receive my rewards, and the audience is vastly larger.

Thanks for mentioning my post!

What really sticks in my craw is that Narrative isn't in any position to make demands of its users. It hasn't even left beta yet. It's not a major name in the content creation space the way Wordpress or Medium is, and even if it were, if it claims to be community-run, it must principally benefit the community. 

When comparing Narrative to other platforms, Narrative doesn't offer much. Yes, its crypto-based reward system and blockchain publishing platform is unique, but Steemit was the first to do that in a major way. Medium, Patreon, SubscribeStar, etc. offer payouts in dollars, which have a fixed and guaranteed value versus NRVE. Plus, it's harder to post content here than on other well-established content (formatting manually is tedious!).

We'd certainly like NRVE to moon and 100x our holdings, but we also have to be prepared for the possibility that it won't -- that all our the time, energy and effort we spend on this platform won't pay off.

Cross-posting to other platforms to spread out our risk and increase the possibility of reward is a perfectly rational choice for users who want to earn profits from posting on Narrative. If Narrative makes it that harder for us to post content here and be rewarded for it, there are many other alternatives that would welcome our content and make it easier to receive rewards. 

Instead of penalizing people who cross-post content, I think we should find a way to satisfactorily address the issue of plagiarism without affecting other innocent users who cross-post their content elsewhere. This would create a win-win solution for everyone. 

Except maybe plagiarists, but, eh, who cares about them.

Cheah posted:

Thanks for mentioning my post!

What really sticks in my craw is that Narrative isn't in any position to make demands of its users. It hasn't even left beta yet. It's not a major name in the content creation space the way Wordpress or Medium is, and even if it were, if it claims to be community-run, it must principally benefit the community. 

When comparing Narrative to other platforms, Narrative doesn't offer much. Yes, its crypto-based reward system and blockchain publishing platform is unique, but Steemit was the first to do that in a major way. Medium, Patreon, SubscribeStar, etc. offer payouts in dollars, which have a fixed and guaranteed value versus NRVE. Plus, it's harder to post content here than on other well-established content (formatting manually is tedious!).

We'd certainly like NRVE to moon and 100x our holdings, but we also have to be prepared for the possibility that it won't -- that all our the time, energy and effort we spend on this platform won't pay off.

Cross-posting to other platforms to spread out our risk and increase the possibility of reward is a perfectly rational choice for users who want to earn profits from posting on Narrative. If Narrative makes it that harder for us to post content here and be rewarded for it, there are many other alternatives that would welcome our content and make it easier to receive rewards. 

Instead of penalizing people who cross-post content, I think we should find a way to satisfactorily address the issue of plagiarism without affecting other innocent users who cross-post their content elsewhere. This would create a win-win solution for everyone. 

Except maybe plagiarists, but, eh, who cares about them.

The claim about community run is a lie.  @Ted himself has said that in the end, even after every feature is put in place, he has the last word.

This deceiving claim by itself could tank the platform!

Add Reply

×
×
×
×