I want to change from the beginning | 7th small settlement & community activity system review

From today onwards I'm going to change the community event, Thanksgiving pop-up event is on!!

𝓩From heaven I will change𝓩

𝔃Article Collection𝔃

• Practice

Daily-wonderful ｜EP01｜Can you not work so hard, but... @yuhao/ Editor-in-Chief of Japanese and Japanese Youth

• Motivation

[Community Activity] Starting today, I want to change: Motivation @Eddie

From today I'm going to change: Inspiration @Alyssa Alyssa

Community Activities] Starting today, I want to change: Motivation @DW

From today I'm going to change: Motivation | Weight Loss @Flora Whimsy

At present, there are a lot of submissions for motivational articles, although they are not much! Because of the small amount of submissions, they are organized into a production form, and I have not read each article once, and will check them all later. .

Although this event will not end until February next year, I am still afraid. After all, I don't know if everyone is preparing. I hope there will be a lot of articles in the future!

𝔃Thanks for the support 𝔃

Thanks to the following 33 authors who supported this campaign and made it possible. If you are interested, you are welcome to contribute to participate!!

@車聯女女, @陈博xuan, @cat traveling [Erica],@loyal to writing, @Flora whimsy, @Checkered Pie Lattica, @白毛Poke, @毛毳, @wubi, @white ferret pen wide noodles, @gangren female paper, @happyanne, @xiaomalailiao, @Eddie, @Bird Ye, @Daisy , @Word Tourist Gary, @zoe, @olive mud, @catfish, @ 星光光, @ fan'an, @xiongtaixiansen ｜Interpretation of soul fragments Promotion, @ yunxun83, @JD Daily, @Agnes Emotional Corner, @Joanna , @Hanhan's professor, @MiSa, @青海一水, @ Carol.W, @ellie, @小K.

𝔃Event rules fine-tuning𝔃

Activity rules, all the rules are memorized in detail in the activity document at the beginning , and there is one rule that has been slightly adjusted:

The original " practice article " rule is that your article must contain 3 conditions: pre-planning, process records, and after-the-fact impressions . However, it was later changed that it can be distributed in many articles, but you have to meet the above 3 conditions, all your articles will be considered qualified. Each plan is calculated independently, that is, one plan does not affect another plan.

Then because some people have doubts, I will add that there are different rules for the practice chapter and the motivation chapter!

Community Activities System Review

𝔃Why not change the bonus distribution 𝔃

I don't know if you have seen this article before? Personally, I feel a little unfair to Matty's request to modify the way of bonus distribution in the proposal. The reason for the official request for revision is that there is no award for " encouraging high-quality works " in the rules of the proposer. This is not a problem! I think the reason for the problem is that when the system came out, Matty did not question it. , of course, it can be said that I did not expect such a problem at the time, but is it a bit unfair for the proposal text that uses the same rules for the community activities of the third season at the same time?

However, I also think that this is indeed a gray area, because the rules of the third season only write: "The proposer can decide the way of bonus distribution, but it must be clearly explained in the proposal post. The process of the activity and the results of bonus distribution, It must be monitored by the community. ” If you accept it in the front, but don’t accept it later, then I really don’t know how to calculate it, and I can only say that the rules should be clearly written in the first place.

Because I personally feel that it needs to be revised, then it will be better to change it in the event of the next season, which is easier to handle and more fair, so this time there is no intention to change the distribution of bonuses.

𝔃Is it shameful to participate and hold events for money? 𝔃

Is it really a shame to organize events and participate in events for the sake of money? For me, there are probably three reasons for doing events: it is fun, encourages creativity, and has money ; the reasons for participating in events are similar. After all, why don't you have money? The more you earn less and less time in this Like Coin, the more attractive it is.

But if everyone is only for money, and then simply proposes and participates in activities, although it does not violate the rules, it is definitely not a phenomenon that a writing platform wants to see . Since there is a bonus for the event, this would have become an incentive to participate in the event and hold the event, so I think what is needed is to raise the threshold for submission, for example, the submission must be at least 1000 words or the like; change it.

𝔃Support more rewards and more rewards distribution issues𝔃

I personally couldn't see any clues about this method at first, but later I saw that some authors questioned, and after I distributed the bonus of the event, I found that " weird? This author's article is clearly well written, but Others get 3 times the bonus? ” Because 15 superiors were selected at that time, but the number of places was limited, so there was no way to choose so many, and the author did not support, which would lead to good articles not getting more bonuses , on the contrary, the more you support, the more you get.

It seems that there is no problem if you invest more and get more, but this is a writing platform ! So how can you expect a good article to get a little bonus, and a poor article to get 3 times the bonus, presumably not what the official expects. But at the same time, this is not clearly stipulated in the rules, so I also feel that this is in a gray area.

𝔃Why not use the so-and-so bonus distribution method?𝔃

I have seen many people use the number of supports, viewing time, and number of clapping hands as the method of award selection, but I have never used this method, because this method will be different due to the popularity of the author. In fact, I have said in this article before that a popular author will be seen and applauded no matter what he writes; an unpopular author or a newcomer does not mean that his writing is not good, but he just doesn’t have many views. And the number of claps can really reflect the quality of the article? It can really be used as an indicator, but because I saw a line of text recently, I didn't expect the number of clapping to be about 250, so I wanted to say that I can change careers.... ..

𝔃Suggestions for the fourth season of community activities 𝔃

Finally, after reading the suggestions made by some people, add some summaries of my own thoughts:

• Proposals are officially reviewed before they can be accepted for community support.

The reason is that the official is really busy. In a situation like today, there are more than 5 supporters. If Guang Fang says that this proposal is not good, it will become very troublesome! In addition, this mechanism can also be used to control the proposal text. quantity.

• lay down the rules clearly

This is really needed. It is really necessary to write everything into the rules in the end. Of course, there will always be unexpected problems. Therefore, like today's question, it should be directly stipulated: "The distribution of bonuses must include awards that encourage high-quality works ."

• The threshold for submission is raised

In addition to drawings, poems and other types of proposals, it is mandatory for submitted articles to be at least 800 words or more than 1,000 words. Personally, this is not difficult, but after participating in Story Solitaire, you will find it more difficult to count the words.

• Reduce the distribution amount of everyone's reward

Limit the distribution of bonuses for everyone, such as up to 50% of the bonus being distributed equally to everyone.

• Add objective indicators to determine winning articles

Add a way to allow design awards to be selected in a relatively objective way. For example, using a voting mechanism or several reviewers to select high-quality articles. (Of course there are still subjective elements)

• Author rating

This is part of a proposed change to the way the ratings are based on support, watch time, and clapped . Because this type of selection method is not very beneficial to newcomers, and there are differences due to the popularity of the author, and even the number of clappings for a line of articles can be selected XD. Therefore, for authors with different popularity, different thresholds are used to judge.

♏My Matters , Personal Website , Plaid, Potato Media
♏This article was first published on Matters , then on my personal website , Grid, Potato Media ♏If you don't know me, you can read this article .
♏Welcome to visit my Opensea !
♏ If you like the article, please clap, support, follow, or support me through sponsored links .