You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: HF20 Optimal Curation Time Changed to 15m, Instead of 30m
Financially, curation is different in that the 25% could be 25% of much more than you could get from upvoting yourself.
Financially, curation is different in that the 25% could be 25% of much more than you could get from upvoting yourself.
Good catch. Yes, the curation mechanic creates a kind of lottery where you can actually make more money than a full vote. However, I have tested it, and at my voting strength, I barley make more than a full vote on posts that get vote botted up to $1000.
The real way to capture curation rewards is to have massive stake. If you are a whale you can capture the lion's share. I think this is dumb, because anyone can see how much a post is paying out. Whales have little curation intensive to upvote posts that already have upvotes.
Also, what is curation? Curation means you get paid to sift through bad content to bring the good content to light. Literally anyone could be doing this, but the way the system is rigged only whales get paid for it. Why does Steem think that whales are better curators than plankton?
I maintain that the real way curation should work is through resteems. If you upvote a post because you clicked on a resteem, the person who resteemed that content should get the curation reward. This makes way more sense.