Selfvote-thread

edb (59) · 7 years ago (edited)

I don't understand. The number of votes doesn't count in Steem. Do you want the change the rules so that the number of votes will count?

There's a theory that the whales were better at curation than a mass audience, but you can't just pretend that everyone had a say in the n^2 system.

$0.00

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

2x as strong votes as another post

I did not mean number of votes, but their strength.

I want the rewards-formula changed back.
That does not mean I want only whales to curate.

$0.05

3 votes

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

Can you imagine if the top ten posts on the trending page were getting rewarded even more based on Vote Weight?

I get the point you are making about self-voting, but I don't think I could go back to getting pennies and watching that shit show of a trending page being even more highly rewarded while everyone else gets less.

$0.00

https://steemit.com/non-linear/@felixxx/why-n-2

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

I got this reply a lot so I made a post about it:

$0.00

thi-js (60) · 7 years ago

This sure as hell does sound like the way it should be ... why did we change that again..

$0.00

edb (59) · 7 years ago

N^2 was the original formula for all votes. It meant that votes of whales counted exponentially more than votes of minnows. Simplified example: 1 Steem Power = 1 vote, 100 SP = 10,000 votes, 1,000 SP = 1,000,000 votes etc. Today, your voting power is equal to the amount of Steem Power you have.

I don't agree that going back and making most users powerless is a good solution.

$0.00

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

I don't agree that going back and making most users powerless is a good solution.

That's not what I am proposing.

$0.00

emrebeyler (74) · 7 years ago

upvoted for lack of aggrandizement.

$4.41

bleujay (70) · 7 years ago

Thank you for posting @felixxx.

There a few issues that could stand addressing.

One way of solving the self-voting may be to limit the number of posts a day.

Also you may have noticed there is a real abuse of the comment section with entire organized groups commenting without voting on said post.....am I correct in thinking this takes value from those who did vote or not? How this could be addressed....I do not know. What I do know is that it is bubbling to the surface as an issue....there are already posts about it.

Thank you for your work as a witness...it is appreciated.

All the best.

Cheers.

$3.85

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

Limiting the number of posts per account per day is not a solution - It can be easily gamed by creating multiple accounts.

$0.00

steevc (73) · 7 years ago

Should it just be about profits? Seems buying votes is profitable too. Let's see in 6 months.

Now, do I vote on my own comment?

$3.84

6 votes

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

Now, do I vote on my own comment?

For maximum profit, you should vote on your own comment.

Should it just be about profits?

Before, there was an incentive to look for good material and vote it.
Self-voting was not the most profitable strategy.
That's why people are still looking for 'OC' and 'good content', but sooner or later they will realize, that selvoters will have more money a year down the road and will have more to say because:

Money talks. 🙄

$5.63

steevc (73) · 7 years ago

I'm doing okay anyway. I expect the profitability will shift when there are millions here. If the Steem price shoots up them I win anyway

$0.35

anthonyadavisii (70) · 7 years ago (edited)

As a pretty adamant non-self voters, I agree as much as I don't like it. I have seen newer accounts whizz past me but don't necessarily think it's a matter of quality or actual effort necessarily.

I think I have taken a difficult stance but I do believe there is a niche for people like me regardless being not only a non-self voters but non vote buyer.

I have a fair amount of followers compared to a lot of these newbies with higher rep so that's nice. Won't pay the bills but better than my adopting a methodology that conflicts with my ideals.

Thanks for bringing more attention to issues related to the current system and self voting. @felixxx

I hope one day something will change but not going to hold my breath. We'll see.

$0.00

thatanimesnob (48) · 7 years ago

Voting bots are not profitable if the steem value drops a lot after a week. I realized that during the week I pumped a lot on a topic I made and steem went down from 6 to 3.

$0.16

7 votes

edb (59) · 7 years ago

Well, if you say so... Just this once!

I'm buying a car this week, and every penny helps. It's not a Lambo yet, but thanks to my cryptos, I don't need to take out a loan.

$3.70

4 votes

mikenero (61) · 7 years ago

Werde ich mal ausprobieren :-)

$1.85

germansailor (70) · 7 years ago

I'll join you. Otherwise I will not vote for my own comments. But that's an exception. Maybe we'll all work together, so something will change soon.

Dann mach ich mal mit. Sonst vote ich meine eigenen Kommentare nicht. Aber das ist einen Ausnahme. Vielleicht bewirken wir alle zusammen, so das sich bald etwas ändert.

$1.67

pompe72 (63) · 7 years ago

Yeah, but if you vote 4 me you'd do me a favor...

$1.59

juanmiguelsalas (68) · 7 years ago

hahaha you should also ask him for the movil wallet ;)

$1.28

3 votes

viraldrome (67) · 7 years ago

I'm afraid to upvote my comment 20 cents but Ned showed me it's okay to do it for big bucks

$1.28

theaustrianguy (72) · 7 years ago (edited)

I am with @steevc. I think the far better ROI will be achieved by a rise in STEEM-price. So acting in a way that favors the growth seems to be the better strategy in the long run.

Yes, it probably will not make a big difference if I self-vote instead of voting others. But if everybody thinks that way, it will make a HUGE difference.

And yes, I would make a few times more money by just self upvoting a lot more. And yes, I have thought about it too, I don't want to lie.

But as long as I find enough valuable content (it doesn't have to be about topics I like, it just has to be content which I think is beneficial to the growth!) to upvote, I think I will go that way ;)

$0.41

4 votes

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

I am with @steevc. I think the far better ROI will be achieved by a rise in STEEM-price. So acting in a way that favors the growth seems to be the better strategy in the long run.

And that strategy would be n^2.

Under n^2 the rewards for my posts would shrink a lot.
I would probably not earn much from posting anymore.
My Steem had at least the chance to become really valuable then, though.

$1.94

6 votes

pawos (62) · 7 years ago

FTLOG = For The Love Of God

$0.38

lucygarrod (51) · 7 years ago

We should be our own biggest fans :D

$0.35

g-keys (39) · 7 years ago

ernsthaft oder ironisch gemeint?
Ich dachte das ist nicht gern gesehen...

P.S.: Vote @felixxx for Witnesses!

$0.33

germansailor (70) · 7 years ago (edited)

Du hast 4x Recht:

es ist ernsthaft gemeint (eine ernste Angelegenheit)
es ist ironisch gemeint
self vote von Kommentaren ist nicht gern gesehen
Vote for @felixxx as whitness!

$0.43

trafo (42) · 7 years ago

Self voting is not worthwhile for me.

$0.21

teamsteem (74) · 7 years ago

I plan on making a post about it eventually.

$0.17

hitmeasap (71) · 7 years ago

Oh, that's definitely something I would read!

$0.00

andyjaypowell (68) · 7 years ago

You are right!

Auf Selbstvotes zu verzichten mag ehrenhaft sein, ist aber im derzeitigen System eher unklug.

$0.10

aschatria (61) · 7 years ago

This is too funny...
well, there are some tricks that are impossible to un-trick for example...

$0.07

triptybarsha (53) · 7 years ago

Upnote vresteemi done

$0.05

sardar-sani (60) · 7 years ago

Interesting strategy...

$0.05

ethanthefighter (55) · 7 years ago

This just sounds like a quote from a great man haha! In the future your quote will be on the internet with those motvational pcitures behind it. Yea I sorta agree but when your me and only have 115 dollars of steem power than I only give myself and others 3-4 cents each upvote..But everyday it's growing! Also I did realize you were a Witness, so I just voted for you! Your awesome my dude!

$0.02

zija2022 (52) · 7 years ago

In other words, we minnows joining last are pretty much filibustered, if the trend of self-voting goes on. I mean what is the point of the quality content everybody is praising when more and more people are votiing themselfs.

$0.02

ethanthefighter (55) · 7 years ago (edited)

Good point well for me I like to give people my upvote under my posts if they actually read or watch my post and respond like they actually saw it. So hopefully that's helping it out.

$0.02

thatanimesnob (48) · 7 years ago

self-voting would be fine if it was giving your posts more visibility WITHOUT providing reward or curation

$0.00

6 votes

uwelang (74) · 7 years ago

He might be a P.O.R.S.C.H.E.

$0.00

topfactro (37) · 7 years ago

Hey @felixxx, i also think so. but i think if we share each other upvote, that will make it more effective....

what you think..?

$0.00

steemnepal (56) · 7 years ago

aggrandizement I learned about this only a or two weeks ago and then it has become my favourite lol

$0.00

thi-js (60) · 7 years ago

This is true for people that have serious SP.

Most people on steemit are way to poor in order to have a decent SP nowadays.

I have to agree with you that the rewared pool is getting some serious damage because of it too, but we should not forget the cute and numerous people for whome this does not apply.

$0.00

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

Without SP your vote doesn't have much impact. Nothing will change that.

What I want is a vote to have more impact on the reward-pool based on how much SP also vote for the same post.

$0.04

thi-js (60) · 7 years ago (edited)

I could not agree more Felix.

All I was saying is that pure self-voting is not the most rewardable strategy for plankton users, they solely rely on people like yourself to give them a proper upvote, and thus providing great content is the way to go for them.

It is true though that the previous n^2 system was better for getting the proper posts out there for more exposure.

I think this has been an ungoing discussion from the moment they decided to change that.

Is it a real possibility that it would get back to how it was someday you think?

$3.11

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

All I was saying is that pure self-voting is not the most rewardable strategy for plankton users, they solely rely on people like yourself to give them a proper upvote, and thus providing great content is the way to go for them.

And I am just a small dolphin account ...

Longterm, selfvoters can easily stake up more than me.

Is it a real possibility that it would get back to how it was someday you think?

I really have no influence on the matter, but I believe these 'linear rewards' are not a stable economical basis. Without 'non-linear' rewards, I honestly think this thing is doomed to fail.

To me it's pretty obvious; but as long as they are profiting from it, most people are having a hard time seeing the issues ... ( paraphrased from some saying )

$0.19

thi-js (60) · 7 years ago

Agreed, it's a serious thing indeed. how could a exponential system lead to a more stable system, it would mean wales combined would be able to influence everything. they just need to get together with the 50 most influential accounts in order to "shape" what steem shoud look like.

I think it's a good thing that we are not in it anymore, but I can see with the power deluding more and more, it should be re-esthablished again. It would lead to a proper curation. It also would mean that the voting bots out there would be way less popular. Vote from people floating in SP would benefit way more than votes from random people that decided to sell their SP to the vote bots.

It's definitely an interesting topic, but for now it feel like people that have been on here long enough to remember, n^2 is the way to go in the future.

I just wont know where to start the discussion again.. i just take photos and rand about how hard it is to be a medical student now and then.

$0.00

felixxx (68) · 7 years ago

Sorry for being a smartass here maybe:

exponential is 2^x, while I want x^2, which is square(?) or quadratic(?) growth (only).
( I will have to look it up. English is not my first language. )

If you had 50 whales, who dominated all shares, the 'crabs in a bucket' analogy would apply.
With 50 real people there would be enough disagreement on rewards.

I just wont know where to start the discussion again.. i just take photos and rand about how hard it is to be a medical student now and then.

I stumbled upon Steemit randomly. And I can't even take good pictures :D

Let's start the discussion here.

The post above was out of frustration, but I will make this into my new blogging topic and break down my thoughts.

I will start on this 'exponential myth'.

Thanks for the chat.
Let's continue under my next post about this ;)

$0.03

thi-js (60) · 7 years ago

Gotta love some smartasses right ;)

See you there

$0.00

leosenior (42) · 7 years ago

For me self voting is far from a common sense. There might be a flaw in the programming, anyway, sooner or later it is going to be fixed.

$0.00