You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: We Double Our Steem Power Upvoting Ourselves Every 181 Days!
Basically, we're the people in on the ground floor of steem. That's why it's paying so well.
EDIT: About 60 million Steem is not powered up. This is about 25% of the total supply. Also, if Steemd.com were fully operational, we could look at active user accounts. Last I looked, there is about 50k accounts active in the last 30 days. 50k people spending 45 million per year, most if it spent by the top accounts.
I think the simplest change would be to just make a greed bot to monitor the heavy abusers of upvoting yourself. Then steemcleaners and others can swoop in and we can start flagging those people. Begin with warning that they're approaching the greed threshold and there you go, they'll back off.
I agree, we're also the ones holding all of our funds in steempower which helps to hold steem up, and the more you have on the line (the more you risk) the more you can potentially be rewarded, as it should be. I do vote for my own comments, not all the time though, and specifically reserve vp for others with less SP, who provide great original content, and who I interact with. If I'm blessed enough to double or triple SP, that means more for others as well. In fact, I plan and hope to shift more to others once I have more to give. Just like in real life :)
Why can you vote up yourself to begin with? Does this make sense? Could be just disabled...
Interesting point made by coinlend! Anyone else with a opinion?
It's a vicious cycle. If they disabled upvoting yourself, abusers would just create new accounts to vote for them. Then when you police having multiple accounts, abusers will collude with others to create accounts upvote you and split the profits.
There is big money at stake. 1000s of dollars may not be much to you, but think of what it means to people in poor countries. Whales buy steem power and create sweat shops where the poor work 16 hours a day upvoting the whale and in return get paid pennies and die young. Allowing upvoting of yourself may not prevent sweat shops, but at least there is not much point in creating sweat shops when you can just upvote yourself.
That's a good point... I guess you also could just implement a bot who does the upvoting automatically. Even cheaper than sweat shops....
Jeez, putting all those starving peasants out of work, You reallly are a skinflint.
Had not thought of that, but you're right. Upvoting yourself is a great solution to people exploiting others.
Doesn't make sense to disable. What would be the point to invest in Steem, if you can't push your articles higher up?
Upvoting comments is also important to get higher up from the crowd.
I only agree of reducing the payouts when upvoting your own comments.
Also, the idea that @crypto-investor mentioned building a penalty bot is really horrible, it's far better to just fix the platform.
First off, I believe just putting in the time to create any type of content (good or bad) deserves some sort of value. Who best to give that value than the person who did the work on the content. That said, instead of disabling, content creators should be incentivized by the system automatically upon putting something up in Steemit and the diminishing returns would take care of the spam. Actually, since not everyone can put up content consistently, the feature to put all your voting power into one Upvote is really important if you believe what you created, say for this month, really deserves it. Further incentives are then given by the community who finds the content 'valuable'.
i join this community not quite long and until this moment i can't figure out how this upvote stuff really work. the post this comment are really helpful.
The technical aspects of Steemit are difficult, to say the least. Fortunately, the community was designed so you don't have to be a programmer. However, it is always good to know what you are doing. Here is an article that explains curation (voting) in detail. I hope it helps...
https://steemit.com/steemit/@calamus056/curation-rewards-explained-in-great-detail
I guess both approaches would help. Who is actually deciding about the new coming or canceling rules? I have seen somewhere something about voting. Please could you clarify this for me. I quite sure we will need both to do. Change the rules (no voting for yourself) and bots which would actually look for selfvoting but using different acounts for that. Because I guess it is also happening.
I don't think it's that serious. We have to stop being so anal. Hell, you're able to upvote and like yourselves on other platforms, just make it so that your upvote value means less. But when we start flagging people ang getting super anal for stupid shit, you potentially chase people away from the platform. This is a trend I keep noticing withing the crypto community, especially when dealing with faucets...All these damned guard dogs guarding the chatrooms and what not. It's ridiculous. Crypto currency is for the people that want to unplug from the system. Yet we become the system in a sense when we keep trying to safe guard petty shit.
I completely agree with you. I do up vote my own posts, but I also up vote other peoples posts. It's kind of like spending hours making a nice meal for your family and then sitting down to enjoy it with them.
It definitely does scare some people away, especially when you're trying to INTRODUCE new members to the crypto-sphere and they see stuff like that.
Thats what I think, too.
I agree, anal is the right word.
100% agreed. We turn ourselves into our own high level security to 'protect' other people, same way all dictatorships are built. If someone is making money I think that can be good marketing to bring others to the platform. Everyone needs to stop thinking so small and defensive. The point of blockchain etc is to break away from these systems of rules. I don't quite understand all the technicalities in this post, but I can sense the 'spirit' in which they're written.
Let free markets works. People will identify where other people have found gaps in the system and vacuums will be filled.
I agree with thebidea of bots scanning for excess self voting. I'm aware I did it a little here the past few days and it's not the way to use the platform. I wouldn't consider myself a minnow even at this point, however carrying a 2100 Power Up balance gives me some nice funds to contribute to the community. I want to share and earn like most in a way thats fosters creativity and encourages posting of good content. Im not a big writer and rarely have time to curate. Any suggestions on my scenario?
Thanks in advance.
@crypto-investor But flagging abusers is wasting voting power that could have rewarded amazing content. It's a mess right now. Something needs to be changed in the protocol so 100% of the users will get rewarded for correcting curation mistakes/abuse so it's an autonomous system that doesn't require external initiatives.
So... with 3 whopping posts under my newb-belt here on Steemit. Am I spinning my wheels?
Def not, keep at it!
No, just growing pains. Stick around, post good content. You will be glad you did.
A bit discouraging for a new minnow who just spent ten hours in the learning curve and creating my Introduction page, posting it, and watching it disappear into the background noise. I did earn an entire $0.05, so all was not lost. Keep on truckin'!
My intro post earned $0.27 five months... and my best paying post this week earned more than $100! It takes time and effort to earn those rewards, but you can get there. Keep at it
Thank you for the encouragement! Learning more always helps!
No and here is and upvote to prove it.
And we are making history!
Nice solution, the best I've heard in fact.
Cg