According to my calculation 10 Votes with 100% will result in $9.15 total post rewards per day or $64.02 per week.
According to my calculation 208 Votes with 100% will result in $49.25 total post rewards for one account per week, or $ 98.50 by using 2 accounts and Steem Power delegation.
Not sure I agree with with all your math so I will try to explain, correct me if I am wrong but the guy using two accounts makes more money in your scenario, but what about the next week after he gets his delegated SP back he will not be making anything and the other guy using only one account will make another 64.02.
So to me it looks like using just one account would be more profitable bringing in $128.10 and you could make even more if you just let your voting power go back to 100% before each vote , taking you to $140.00 VS $98.50 the guy with two accounts is going to make. So using one account would make 42.13% more.
Hi @halo, you are right in the case that Selfvoter A should be able to vote 10 times a day with 100% voting power if he exactly scedules the votes with a period of 2.4 hours. So his earnings are $70.00 per week.
For Selfvoter B I implicitly assumed (it is not well formulated in the post), that he votes all of his 208 comments as fast as possible, in best case using a bot. In this case he needs:
208 blocks to vote the 208 comments with account 1
1 block to delegate the SP to account 2
208 blocks to vote the 208 comments with account 2
1 block to withdraw the SP
Means in best case he needs 418 blocks = 1254 seconds = around 21 minutes to vote all of his stuff. And than he needs to wait exactly 7 days and he can repeat the same procedure.
If he does it manually, I assume it takes not more than 2 hours to vote all of his stuff. But to keep it simple, let's assume he needs exactly 2.4 hours for the procedure. Means that selfvoter A is able to do one vote more than in my calculation above.
So Selfvote B should be able to get $98.50 in 7 days and 2.4 hours, and Selfvoter A should be able to get $71.00 in the same timeframe. This is an outperformance of around 38.73%.
@twinner Thank you for replying , at first I thought that Selfvoter B took a full week to make his votes but I see now it is all in one day , 21 min to be exact. So yes I agree Selfvoter B could make 38.73 % more. This would be very hard to do without a bot.
Ok, double voting with the same Steem Power is possible, but it is also profitable? Keep in mind that both accounts now are not able to vote the next 7 days with the delegated SP. Meantime other accounts can vote 10 times with 100% per day.
I don't know how it all works for sure. I was going off what @twinner wrote and according to what he wrote it can not be repeated weekly. Looks like by weekly to me.
I understand his scenario is 1 week but if you take the math out two weeks you lost money by doing it because the delegated SP will not be useable by either account for that second week, but using one account you would still get your 10 votes a day @ 100%.
Why do you think you can't use the SP for the second week? Here's the timeline: Day 1 vote with account a, delegate to account b, vote with account b, remove delegation.
Days 2-7 wait.
Day 8 vote with account a, delegate to account b, vote with account b, remove delegation.
Days 8-14 wait
Ok, double voting with the same Steem Power is possible, but it is also profitable? Keep in mind that both accounts now are not able to vote the next 7 days with the delegated SP. Meantime other accounts can vote 10 times with 100% per day.
Because it is right there in @twinners post, but I think I understand what was confusing me , I was thinking the trades were taking a whole week and they don't he is doing it all in one day. Thank you @improv
Interesting find. I didn't follow the math 100%. Does it account for the user who did the delegation not being able to vote with their SP for 7 days? Since every day voting power recharges 20%, that is a lot of voting that they are missing out on while they wait for their SP to be returned.
His idea was that the first account would exhaust 100% of its power before delegating it.
Extending the return time to 11 days solves the financial issue but could undermine usage of delegation. Who wants to tie up their power so long? Even 7 days is a lot.
My suggestions for a code fix is that:
you should not be able to delegate power that is drained - only unused power (this might come across to lenders as too rigid) and/or
power delegated in a drained state does not start to recharge until it returns back to you (this still doesn't seem fair that drained power magically and instantly recharges for use by the borrower) and/or
drained delegated power needs to recharge before it is usable by the borrower (NiCad Battery Model).
I like #3 the best as the most flexible, fair and logical solution. It might involve assigning a depletion /recharge state or clock to each unit/block/contract of power that is independent of lender/borrower. IRL if you loan me a depleted battery I need to recharge it to use it. Makes sense to me.
It is, but the one who do it are so low on Steem Power and post so low quality stuff that is not even noticed by the chain. It will be a problem if they see that they can deposit, but usually who does this does not deposit.
It defies the laws of physics -- big whales swim through tiny loopholes while we minnows are smacking our lips at the glass on the aquarium tank. Thankfully, they seem to do it in a way that benefits us too :-)
Hey @twinner,
great calculation & experiment you've done there. But anyways I think it's not necessary to increase the downtime at all. I mean, you gotta have more than 400 Posts or comments active and as well to vote on all of them. So someone taking this struggle might have really earned those few extra dollars 😉
Not sure I agree with with all your math so I will try to explain, correct me if I am wrong but the guy using two accounts makes more money in your scenario, but what about the next week after he gets his delegated SP back he will not be making anything and the other guy using only one account will make another 64.02.
So to me it looks like using just one account would be more profitable bringing in $128.10 and you could make even more if you just let your voting power go back to 100% before each vote , taking you to $140.00 VS $98.50 the guy with two accounts is going to make. So using one account would make 42.13% more.
Hi @halo, you are right in the case that Selfvoter A should be able to vote 10 times a day with 100% voting power if he exactly scedules the votes with a period of 2.4 hours. So his earnings are $70.00 per week.
For Selfvoter B I implicitly assumed (it is not well formulated in the post), that he votes all of his 208 comments as fast as possible, in best case using a bot. In this case he needs:
Means in best case he needs 418 blocks = 1254 seconds = around 21 minutes to vote all of his stuff. And than he needs to wait exactly 7 days and he can repeat the same procedure.
If he does it manually, I assume it takes not more than 2 hours to vote all of his stuff. But to keep it simple, let's assume he needs exactly 2.4 hours for the procedure. Means that selfvoter A is able to do one vote more than in my calculation above.
So Selfvote B should be able to get $98.50 in 7 days and 2.4 hours, and Selfvoter A should be able to get $71.00 in the same timeframe. This is an outperformance of around 38.73%.
@twinner Thank you for replying , at first I thought that Selfvoter B took a full week to make his votes but I see now it is all in one day , 21 min to be exact. So yes I agree Selfvoter B could make 38.73 % more. This would be very hard to do without a bot.
Wrote an article discussing solutions and raised the issue on Github. Comment link to Github issue is at the end of this post https://steemit.com/steemit/@cyberspace/proposed-steemit-fix-for-steem-power-delegation-self-voting-loophole
Sure he will. The process is repeatable weekly. After 7 days, both accounts will have recovered their voting power.
I don't know how it all works for sure. I was going off what @twinner wrote and according to what he wrote it can not be repeated weekly. Looks like by weekly to me.
Right, it's just one 7 day period, though, not two. @twinner has already accounted for that with their math.
I understand his scenario is 1 week but if you take the math out two weeks you lost money by doing it because the delegated SP will not be useable by either account for that second week, but using one account you would still get your 10 votes a day @ 100%.
Why do you think you can't use the SP for the second week? Here's the timeline: Day 1 vote with account a, delegate to account b, vote with account b, remove delegation.
Days 2-7 wait.
Day 8 vote with account a, delegate to account b, vote with account b, remove delegation.
Days 8-14 wait
Repeat ad infinitum.
Because it is right there in @twinners post, but I think I understand what was confusing me , I was thinking the trades were taking a whole week and they don't he is doing it all in one day. Thank you @improv
No problem!
Halo, I love you..your logic makes more sense..at least to me.
Probably not an issue for smaller accounts, but I could definitely see large accounts abusing this loophole.
Same thought after reading the post. Wonder at what rate this is happening.
Interesting find. I didn't follow the math 100%. Does it account for the user who did the delegation not being able to vote with their SP for 7 days? Since every day voting power recharges 20%, that is a lot of voting that they are missing out on while they wait for their SP to be returned.
His idea was that the first account would exhaust 100% of its power before delegating it.
Extending the return time to 11 days solves the financial issue but could undermine usage of delegation. Who wants to tie up their power so long? Even 7 days is a lot.
My suggestions for a code fix is that:
I like #3 the best as the most flexible, fair and logical solution. It might involve assigning a depletion /recharge state or clock to each unit/block/contract of power that is independent of lender/borrower. IRL if you loan me a depleted battery I need to recharge it to use it. Makes sense to me.
Wrote an article analyzing the various solutions here https://steemit.com/steemit/@cyberspace/proposed-steemit-fix-for-steem-power-delegation-self-voting-loophole
Thanks
Wrote an article with solutions here. Hope it helps.
You bet. I updated my last comment.
Yes, I account this that User B is not able to vote for 7 days after withdrawing the SP delegation.
This should be fixed asap. Hard to imagine that this kind of double voting is not already happening at considerable scale.
Didn't we speak about this yesterday (related) :-)?
Related as far as we had a chat about SP Delegation. Yet we didn´t touch this issue here.
Yep and what happens with the delegation and curation rewards when power is back with the delegating party - not exactly yeah i know.
agree totally!
It is, but the one who do it are so low on Steem Power and post so low quality stuff that is not even noticed by the chain. It will be a problem if they see that they can deposit, but usually who does this does not deposit.
Article here has link to the issue I raised on Github https://steemit.com/steemit/@cyberspace/proposed-steemit-fix-for-steem-power-delegation-self-voting-loophole
Good job! Did you file a github issue yet?
Thank you @pharesim. I have no glue how github works.
How do you delegate your steempower to another account what is the process
check out @timcliff's tutorial here
I used Vessel by @jesta.
Great effort for finding this out. And especially pointing it out! Hope this will be fixed in the near future.
Cheers,
Ernst
OMG, this is for a minnow like me a discussion between big whales.
OMG, you crack me up! Always good to get a good laugh. They found a loophole that can be exploited. Now that they know, they can stop the bleeding.
It defies the laws of physics -- big whales swim through tiny loopholes while we minnows are smacking our lips at the glass on the aquarium tank. Thankfully, they seem to do it in a way that benefits us too :-)
I'm sure not telling you what to do,
but it's still using two accounts to Game the steemit ecosystem,
I'm sure everyone but me has multiple accounts. Whatever.
I just don't roll that way,
I'm here to have a channel to post my interests, not to game the system.
I'm probably the Stupid one, but cheating people in any form is not the way I roll,
And in another 20 years or so, I'm pretty sure you will feel the same way.
No, you are not hurting any person,
but what effect on the ecosystem will this stunt have when 5,000 people are doing it ?
No, Not for me.
I this is a good way to get your reputation flagged to dust.
well it's very possible as I said in my intro this place is not for me.
Seems a lot of folks have missunderstood the headline. This is no call to do it.
The phrase "A tutorial for the advanced Selfvoter" was sarcasm.
There are currently a lot of selfvoters with 100k+ SP in the wallet voting shameless all off their comments with 100%, and nothing else.
Hey @twinner,
great calculation & experiment you've done there. But anyways I think it's not necessary to increase the downtime at all. I mean, you gotta have more than 400 Posts or comments active and as well to vote on all of them. So someone taking this struggle might have really earned those few extra dollars 😉
It's easy to do it automatically by a bot.