As I understand, it actually should be 50% to the author (and beneficiaries) and 50% to the curators, but you have to be careful with how you understand the total value. Up until recently, the total value displayed included TRX distribution that wasn't happening any more, and with Tron's relatively high price that was inflating the reported totals by a lot. That was fixed now, so the discrepancy should be smaller now. But, I believe that the reported total is based on the median price of STEEM over 3 1/2 days, so if the STEEM price is volatile, the value at payout time can be very different from the price that's reported on the exchanges. (this can move the actual payout higher or lower, but the discrepancies should balance out over time)
RE: Programming Diary #28: Thoughts on the problem of overvaluation
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Programming Diary #28: Thoughts on the problem of overvaluation
This is from a payout four days ago. In this example, curators are getting almost double. It's the same for every payout among the curator report posts I've looked at. Is this some sort of issue left over from the TRX removal? It seems odd to me that the curator pool would be that large versus the author reward.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
ok. Our replies crossed in the mail😉. See my other reply. The web site just doesn't report the beneficiary numbers after payout time, but it did split 50/50.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That was what was confusing me. I'm glad I asked now; thank you for explaining. I was looking at it wrong. But see, it's things like this that go unanswered that further hurt this site. Without a way to ask questions, it gets left up to the imagination, which = people leaving in the process once frustration fully sets in.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes, after that I also moaned a lot ;-)) By the way, a good place to ask questions and get well-founded answers is the Talk Channel in the WOX... Mostly no one uses it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Again, the problem is that we have to look at the comments of a post several times (as I did with this post :-) ). The questions that are usually raised in the post are less interesting for me.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yeah, we can definitely use better documentation and places to ask questions. These are the sorts of things that we can do in a decentralized way if we grow the community enough, but it's sort of a catch-22. In the meantime, I'm happy to answer questions like these whenever I am able.
Coincidentally, this reporting with beneficiary rewards is exactly why I calculated the total the way I did in the browser extension. Here's what the curator's overlay shows for that post:
As described above:
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
As an approximate value, this calculation is absolutely fine.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit