Hi, Debra. Yes, I think an expanding curation team is an inevitable part of the process, which will lead to fluctuations in approval rates and the style/content of what gets picked. I just hope they are using the vast amount of data they should have to ensure a smooth onboarding and standardisation process by workshopping previously approved and rejected pieces, and looking at what factors went into those past decisions.
Fair enough not to reveal or discuss that with nominators, but they need to use the info they have inhouse to avoid inconsistency as far as possible, given the subjectivity already inevitably baked into a human system.
I don't know if they will be aiming to curtail the number approved by each nominator with the expansion process. My impression (supported by the introduction of lifted quotas just as the number of nommers was itself increasing) is more that the end game involves having pretty much everything visible on the site, in the first page or two of everyone's 'For you' feed being a boosted story. With the idea that anyone searching /browsing for content in their interest area, on Medium and the wider web, will come across a Medium-published piece that has been through that dual quality filter, and so feel compelled to sign up for this magnificent 'quality, thoughtful, authoritative miniweb'.
Which sounds like a noble aim, to create a user-generated universal online magazine offering genuine quality rather than just random brainfarts and stream of consciousness 'what I had for breakfast' blogposts. But the worry within the context of the Medium mechanic is: what happens to good writers and their work that fall through the cracks? And what happens to non-boosting pubs? I haven't submitted a single piece to a non-booster for months, except for a couple run by Medium friends whom I wish to support. It's otherwise just not worth hobbling an article's chances of readership that way. I feel bad about it, but if I am taking time from my dayjob to write, I need to give those words the best possible chance of gaining readers and earning a few bucks.
I feel very lucky to have had my pub added to the programme, but if I hadn't, I think I would be quitting the platform very soon. I think they need to offer hope to those who find themselves in that situation, but as they always refuse to set out specific roadmaps, rather than theoretical goals, I can see the frustration rising.
Does that make sense to you?
