I've battled with this topic the entire time I have been on steemit. When steemvoter came out, I toyed with it because it sounded like a great idea at the time, however, I was not happy with the results. Yes, it voted on some of my favorite authors, but not always. I will say that it is a great option for when you are traveling, for example, I will probably engage it while I travel to London and then to steemfest. But, the 85% of the time, I prefer manual curation, it just feels that I have more power to engage and try to reward up and coming authors. The debate in my head goes on.
I re-read your post from 5 months ago. It appears to me some things changed a bit since HF 19 on the timing of curation, but I can't scientifically prove it. I'd love to know if did change or is it just me?
Its good that sometimes whales vote others who are also posting good quality content than voting the same person over and over again.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
totally agree with you
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I totally agree. Unfortunately what you see in Steemit is a certain "monopoly" of privileged people who always receive votes from the whales, while many new and old platform users even producing extremely valuable content are forgotten on the platform.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If they could only randomly distribute their votes to the masses, what a wonderful world it would be. What happens is aside from voting their own peers, others are selling it for a price. That's what money can do, it can change human perspective.
A year ago, I heard from a huge person in the platform that Steemit were created to provide financial stability to its members but that's not what we see right now. The same people over and over again are gaining and controlling the market.
Just an observation.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If they could only randomly distribute their votes to the masses, what a wonderful world it would be. What happens is aside from voting their own peers, others are selling it for a price. That's what money can do, it can change human perspective.
A year ago, I heard from a huge person in the platform that Steemit were created to provide financial stability to its members but that's not what we see right now. The same people over and over again are gaining and controlling the market.
Just an observation.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I totally agree. Unfortunately what you see in Steemit is a certain "monopoly" of privileged people who always receive votes from the whales, while many new and old platform users even producing extremely valuable content are forgotten on the platform.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Only the reward curve changed, not the penalty as far as I know. Back then being a small account and voting early on something that would payout thousands of $ would give you a lot more SP in rewards than it does now.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That's good to know. Thank you for giving me some clarification
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Ah. I see. Thanks for that tip.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I user steemvoter for my favorite authors but do most of my curating manually too. Engaging with the community is the real value on Steemit and creating good content.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
i vouch this :_
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This seems like a solid approach. You are right...after all, did people join just to make money, or for engagement and quality content as well? Seems like being able to enjoy all three is the ideal.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's all a battle with curation isn't it? This is well said. and thank you for voicing this.
I too played with SteemVoter a bit when I joined, I also was manually voting, and thus my VP ended up super low and I had no idea what was going on.
Since then I have stuck to mostly all manual voting so as to keep myself engaged, and to not reward crappy content. People who know they have autovotes can (and sometimes do) get lazy and post crap. I don't want to automatically vote on their crap just because I like them. I don't automatically give anyone an upvote, even the people I consider myself closest to on the platform have to earn the vote.
Maybe when I get more established and can't keep up with my feed as well that could change, but for now, I don't worry so much about the curation reward, and more just vote the things I like!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'd like to earn your vote mike. Check out my page when you get a chance - I like to write up articles about real estate investing. It's tough growing an audience - autovotes are nice , but as you said it's better to earn the votes from real people who actually took the time to read or at least skim the article.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Everything has its points of interest and inconveniences same runs with way of voting. Yet, in the event that I were to ask, I'd favor that some way or another whale voters change their voting propensities after some time and let others pick up fulfillment in the stage and abstain from seeing similar names again and again on drifting page.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit