This paper presents an empirical analysis of Steemit, a key representative of the emerging incentivized social media platforms over Blockchains, to understand and evaluate the actual level of decentralization and the practical effects of cryptocurrency-driven reward system in these modern social media platforms. Similar to Bitcoin, Steemit is operated by a decentralized community, where 21 members are periodically elected to cooperatively operate the platform through the Delegated Proof-of-Stake (DPoS) consensus protocol. Our study performed on 539 million operations performed by 1.12 million Steemit users during the period 2016 03 to 2018 08 reveals that the actual level of decentralization in Steemit is far lower than the ideal level, indicating that the DPoS consensus protocol may not be a desirable approach for establishing a highly decentralized social media platform. In Steemit, users create contents as posts which get curated based on votes from other users. The platform periodically issues cryptocurrency as rewards to creators and curators of popular posts. Although such a reward system is originally driven by the desire to incentivize users to contribute to high-quality contents, our analysis of the underlying cryptocurrency transfer network on the blockchain reveals that more than 16 transfers of cryptocurrency in Steemit are sent to curators suspected to be bots and also finds the existence of an underlying supply network for the bots, both suggesting a significant misuse of the current reward system in Steemit. Our study is designed to provide insights on the current state of this emerging blockchain-based social media platform including the effectiveness of its design and the operation of the consensus protocols and the reward system.
In recent years, due to the rapid growth and consistent popularity, social media platforms have received significant attention from researchers. A large number of research papers have analyzed several popular social media platforms from various perspectives @cite_30 @cite_5 @cite_27 @cite_11 @cite_6 @cite_14 @cite_19 @cite_25 @cite_28 . Tan @cite_19 investigated users' behavior in and found that users continually post in new communities. Singer @cite_6 observed a general quality drop of comments made by users during activity sessions. Hessel @cite_25 investigated the interactions between highly related communities and found that users engaged in a newer community tend to be more active in their original community. @cite_14 , the authors studied the browsing and voting behavior of users and found that most users do not read the article that they vote on. An extensive survey of recent research on is provided in @cite_3 . Besides , several other social media platforms have also been analyzed by researchers. Wang @cite_5 analyzed the platform and found that the quality of Quora’s knowledge base is mainly contributed by its user heterogeneity and question graphs. Anderson @cite_28 investigated the platform and observed significant assortativity in the reputations of co-answerers, relationships between reputation and answer speed.
@cite_30 @cite_14 @cite_28 @cite_6 @cite_3 @cite_19 @cite_27 @cite_5 @cite_25 @cite_11
2197211043 2949603202 160646531 2394682549
Community-based question answering platforms can be rich sources of information on a variety of specialized topics, from finance to cooking. The usefulness of such platforms depends heavily on user contributions (questions and answers), but also on respecting the community rules. As a crowd-sourced service, such platforms rely on their users for monitoring and flagging content that violates community rules. Common wisdom is to eliminate the users who receive many flags. Our analysis of a year of traces from a mature Q&A site shows that the number of flags does not tell the full story: on one hand, users with many flags may still contribute positively to the community. On the other hand, users who never get flagged are found to violate community rules and get their accounts suspended. This analysis, however, also shows that abusive users are betrayed by their network properties: we find strong evidence of homophilous behavior and use this finding to detect abusive users who go under the community radar. Based on our empirical observations, we build a classifier that is able to detect abusive users with an accuracy as high as 83 . When large social-media platforms allow users to easily form and self-organize into interest groups, highly related communities can arise. For example, the Reddit site hosts not just a group called food, but also HealthyFood, foodhacks, foodporn, and cooking, among others. Are these highly related communities created for similar classes of reasons (e.g., to focus on a subtopic, to create a place for allegedly more "high-minded" discourse, etc.)? How do users allocate attention between such close alternatives when they are available or emerge over time? Are there different types of relations between close alternatives such as sharing many users vs. a new community drawing away members of an older one vs. a splinter group failing to cohere into a viable separate community? We investigate the interactions between highly related communities using data from reddit.com consisting of 975M posts and comments spanning an 8-year period. We identify a set of typical affixes that users adopt to create highly related communities and build a taxonomy of affixes. One interesting finding regarding users' behavior is: after a newer community is created, for several types of highly-related community pairs, users that engage in a newer community tend to be more active in their original community than users that do not explore, even when controlling for previous level of engagement. The rapidly increasing popularity of Web 2.0 online communities originates in the ease of collaborative content creation and its sharing. As a result, more community members actively participate in the community and its data growth rates are continuously increasing. This poses the challenge for community platform operators on efficient administration and moderation to ensure the quality of content and to prevent violations of laws (e.g. copyright, privacy, illegal content) and community rules. Involvement of employed administrators who read and approve every piece of user-generated content is clearly the safest way of quality assurance. Since this is a time consuming task it does not scale up with Web 2.0 dimensions. So administrative functions are delegated to members of the community, the moderators. The strategy for choosing trustworthy moderators in big anonymous communities is specified in policies based on user reputation that is measured in bonus points. The proper balancing between community self-management and administration is crucial for the quality, attractiveness, and scalability of the entire community. Therefore understanding the mutual influences between community actors, reputation systems and platform policies that employ user reputation is crucial to ensure the overall quality, user acceptance, and success of the entire online community. Our objective is to predict the behavior in an online community for different policies, which may result in different overall quality of the community content. For this purpose we present our community analysis framework CoSiMo (an acronym for Community Simulation and Modeling), which employs the model-based approach for predicting the impact of policies on community dynamics and health. Through systematic variation of simulated quality assurance mechanisms we show that our model plausibly captures the influence of policies to content quality and can be therefore exploited for optimization of real online communities. Social media platforms have become a major gateway to receive and analyze public opinions. Understanding users can provide invaluable context information of their social media posts and significantly improve traditional opinion analysis models. Demographic attributes, such as ethnicity, gender, age, among others, have been extensively applied to characterize social media users. While studies have shown that user groups formed by demographic attributes can have coherent opinions towards political issues, these attributes are often not explicitly coded by users through their profiles. Previous work has demonstrated the effectiveness of different user signals such as users’ posts and names in determining demographic attributes. Yet, these efforts mostly evaluate linguistic signals from users’ posts and train models from artificially balanced datasets. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive list of user signals: self-descriptions and posts aggregated from users’ friends and followers, users’ profile images, and users’ names. We provide a comparative study of these signals side-by-side in the tasks on inferring three major demographic attributes, namely ethnicity, gender, and age. We utilize a realistic unbalanced datasets that share similar demographic makeups in Twitter for training models and evaluation experiments. Our experiments indicate that self-descriptions provide the strongest signal for ethnicity and age inference and clearly improve the overall performance when combined with tweets. Profile images for gender inference have the highest precision score with overall score close to the best result in our setting. This suggests that signals in self-descriptions and profile images have potentials to facilitate demographic attribute inferences in Twitter, and are promising for future investigation.