The reward pool isn't for investor but for bloggers and curators, it states this in the white paper. The downvotes are wrong and he needs to remove them and stop his personal views that he knows best on who can earn what.
The reward pool isn't for investor but for bloggers and curators, it states this in the white paper. The downvotes are wrong and he needs to remove them and stop his personal views that he knows best on who can earn what.
Right, I don't quite understand the logic that he used to determine what post would receive his attention. Steem generates an amount for curation rewards each day. If that reward goes to one user or another, it does not effect the price of Steem and whether or not that content is evergreen or digestable within 7 days, again is not relevant to the value of Steem. To grow his investment and thusly the whole ecosystem he should be upvoting various well written content. Not downvoting. Downvoting should be used to get ride of the spam posters and make it difficult for them to post.
That, in part, is the problem. Some people are treating this platform as an investment tool. Buy some steem, wait for it to go high, then sell.
In my opinion, Steemit should be about helping people free themselves from having to be bound to a mundane 8-5 job, doing things that they don't want to do.
Absofuckinlutely!
https://steemitstage.com/steemit/@schattenjaeger/if-you-accept-the-upvotes-you-really-need-to-accept-the-downvotes
Related post with salient points and relevant link by @ats.david in the comments. I'm trying to remain dispassionate and look at this from all angles. Although I wish the downvotes brigade would stick to spammers