You might consider adding more "criteria" to the end of articles besides claps. Claps are fine for suggesting how much a reader thinks an author should be paid for an article, from 0 to 50. But it doesn't give an author much feedback on what readers think. Why not add other assessment criteria (1 point/criteron for each reader of an article, not 50) for things like "clickbait," "opinion, not information," "poor editing," and so on? It would give authors some real information about how their articles are perceived so they don't have to read clickbait articles on "how I made a million dollars my first month on Medium." It would also be good feedback for publication editors. They might find that the characteristics they look for in articles are not the same as what their readership is looking for.