RE: Discontinuing my daily statistics posts
these posts obtained around $5500 from the whale with 24 votes
As I explained in another comment, this is misleading and dishonest. My vote on a post alone pays out about $42, and this number is backed by an actual test (I found a random post in New and voted on it, as a test, before removing the vote; in the process I burned about $20 of my voting power, but getting accurate real world data made it perhaps worthwhile). Thus 25 votes would be about $1050, not $5000. The rewards on @masteryoda's posts, including rewards of sometimes $50 or more when I didn't even vote on them are the result of my votes along with many others' votes.
@clayop, please stop lying and trolling about whales' influence. Yes, whales have a lot of influence but when people like you who should know better (and I would argue do know better) distort the facts and constantly approach these issues from a negative perspective it brings down the entire platform. I have not been downvoting your comments consistently even when they are formed on the basis of lies, half-truths, distortions, and negative trolling, but if these continue I will start doing so in the future.
There are ways to work positively to build Steem into a better community, but you, unlike @masteryoda, are choosing a different, decidedly more negative approach that is filled with criticism (even when couched as 'data') and is increasingly bitter. Please reconsider it.
If you intended to give him $50 per post, you could adjust your vote after a post reached to hundreds dollars, or you could skip some following posts to set the average to $50~100 (or whatever you want). But the your actual contribution in the payouts is around $5000 in a month. You had enough options to adjust the degree of the payouts, but you neglected. Now @ned tried to adjust it and you are against his action.
And what am I lying about? I can open my code (although its shamefully dirty) then everyone can run the same analysis. I think the negative perspective is not from these analysis but from some behaviors of some members. If there is no such behaviors, the analysis cannot tell any negative things.
IMHO, @masteryoda now can run his own web service with rewards he obtained so far, and provide the same stats.
I intended to give my vote. The rewards are up to other voters and the system and I don't control them, nor do I have any intention of continually monitoring the rewards of every post I vote on to fine tune a particular reward level. That is absurd.
I do sometimes remove or adjust my vote on a post if I find the overall reward to be excessive and I think I may have done that in one or two cases of @masteryoda's posts (not sure). But in general I did not and do not find the overall rewards he is receiving to be excessive given the positive reception these posts and masteryoda's presentation and presence have in the community and what that suggests about value.
Value is subjective as I'm sure you are aware and I don't necessarily find original novels, poems, etc. to be more valuable than @masteryoda's contributions (and I use that word broadly to encompass the positive presentation and vibe that he brings to Steem). In some cases such original-works posts may be very valuable, but not necessarily. If I tried to write an original novel and posted chapters, my ability to do so would suggest that you should downvote it based on value.
That is a measure of contribution (or elsewhere you call it influence, though in fact it is neither) that you made up and which allocates a composite result of a collaborative voting process over time in a particular, and as it happens, very peculiar manner. In effect, it assumes each voter returns to each post the same instant right before payout and makes an explicit decision whether or not to remove his or her vote independent of the observed or anticipated actions of other voters. That is not how the system normally operates, not how people use it, and it is not reasonable to ever expect this to approximate reality at all.
This is false I have stated several times in this thread that I support @ned taking the action he did based on his perception of the value. I had some disagreement with some of his reasons he shared with me privately but ultimately it is his vote and his choice.
Thank you @smooth for your support of my statistics posts, obviously many people like them and find them valuable as it clearly shows in this post’s comments and your support has a lot to do with them becoming so popular. I apologize for the time you had to spend on this post to explain your point of view, unfortunately some people insist on vilifying me, my posts and people who support them. To those no matter what we say it will not change anything.
You are definitely one of the wisest big stake holders who truly care about this project and its future. Thanks again!
@smooth, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that your vote did worth around $75 or more before. The reason of current $42 worth is that, steem decreased in value and so the account value too. Take the example of Aug 25 2016 when Steem was at 0.0019 (open price) and BTC was at $577 (open price) which means 0.0019 x 577 = 1 USD per STEEM but today, it worth 40 US Cents. So, your vote was worth around $90 before.
Even on 8th september, steem was worth 0.75 USD which means your vote did worth around $75. And I don't know if you meant $42 worth for both of your accounts or single, because your witness account is also powerful.
BTW, I am neutral in this case and just thought to leave my reply as I felt it essential because @clayop is not completely lying, although I don't think $5000 could be correct figure, he said 24 votes which means, he imagined your vote $200 worthy which is nothing but a big mistake or error.
Oh and by the way, I waited for your more replies but I feel like you forgot to check again. Check them out and share your thoughts.
@steemist I can't reply directly to your comment because of nesting. You are of course correct that the value of a solo vote will vary depending on the price of STEEM, level of account voting power (when I did the test I was at about 99%, but in general many of my votes have been made with lower vote power), and other factors such as the level other voting activity that day. My test did include both accounts BTW.
Thanks for taking your time. So, you tested your both account and that's something I wasn't sure about before.
Yes, value of votes also depend on how many people upvoted before you, and if any whale voted before you and you vote after that whale, your vote value will increase automatically.