Some believe that all Self-Voting is bad while others don’t have any problem with it. I’ve seen calls to have Self-Voting banned but the truth of it is that if someone wants to Self-Vote then they can easily get around a ban by creating a sock puppet account and voting from it instead. So I personally think it’s better to try and understand why people Self-Vote and try to find out where consensus says the line is drawn between what is Legitimate and what is Abuse. Welcome to the first of my posts exploring the Grey Areas of STEEM.
Source
Before I start, this is a bit of a work in progress. If I’ve missed anything or you disagree with what I’m saying then feel free to post a comment and throw in your 2 cents worth (literally or figuratively - I don’t mind). My objective here is to try and understand these Grey Areas a bit better myself so that I can figure out where the consensus might be on what is generally considered to be acceptable behaviour. So here they are – The reasons for Self-Voting :-
Source
There is a small checkbox on Steemit.com where there is an option to “Upvote Post” when you submit some new content. This is generally considered to be an easy shortcut to Self-Voting your own post while submitting it and many use it for the purpose of giving their new content a bit of a boost so that it can get on its way to the Trending page. A lot of people have started using bid bots and even the seemingly defunct “Promoted” feature to try and boost the exposure of their own content in a similar way and this practise of paying to promote your content seems to be widespread on the platform. In this instance a user is spending some of their own Voting Power rather than paying someone else to promote their post.
Source
Once a user has posted some new content, many comments from other Steemians might start coming in. Some of those comments could be comprehensive, invaluable and/or insightful, while others might just be vague, brief and/or spammy. It is very common for dedicated Steemians to try and answer questions or provide additional content for people who have engaged with their posts by commenting. Comment Curation is the process of upvoting comments so that they are “bumped” and will appear higher on the page. It is done so that new readers can read beyond the original post and find more valuable content as they read through the top comments. Some Steemians will also comment on others posts and Self-Vote their comments so that they are boosted above the poor quality posts (often bot spam) and thus become more visible.
Source
There is a generally held view that we are here on STEEM to reward good content and we should be upvoting content that we think is undervalued and downvoting content that we think might be overvalued from a rewards (earnings) perspective. What this means is that if some people are posting or commenting and they believe they have added more value to the platform or the discussion than the rewards currently show, then they should Self-Vote to ensure that their valuable contribution is appropriately rewarded.
Source
This is the process of Self-Voting for the purpose of maximising ones own rewards and ensuring the best possible ROI (Return on Investment) for the STEEM POWER that has been vested by a user. It can even be possible to lease STEEM POWER delegations from others and then 100% Self-Vote to cover the lease expense and then guarantee a profit on top of it.
So I’ll be right up front and admit that I Self-Vote myself on occasion for the purpose of #2 and at the start of my journey I Self-Voted for the purpose of #1 but I don’t bother with Self-Voting for Post Promotion any more (partly because my vote is too weak). I have also recently gone to war with a user and downvoted them for Self-Voting for the purpose of #4. So for me what I consider Legitimate is #1 and #2 and what I consider Abuse is #4 which puts my Grey Area somewhere around #3. But I am genuinely interested to hear others views on this. Maybe I am in the minority here. Maybe some would consider me to be a Self-Voting Abuser, or maybe some would consider me to be an Aggressor or an Oppressor for initiating a war against a poor innocent minnow who was just trying to get a Return on their Investment. It's a Grey Area right?
https://www.showclix.com
https://www.careerbuilder.com
http://jonochsblog.com
https://www.trendhunter.com
http://www.ptcrecruiting.com
I think it matters depending on Steem power. For whales to be able to self upvote their post hundreds of dollars regardless of content seems outside the point of curation.
For minnows just starting out it makes sense to self upvote until you get noticed and start receiving larger upvote from the community.
However at the end of the day I favor decentralized action over centralized oppression.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's an interesting angle. I hadn't considered the relativity of the voters STEEM POWER. Thanks for your comments! :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's an interesting debate. I was dead set against it at one time but now I share my votes out between self voting and curating. I have a long term plan and self voting helps me to achieve that plan. At the same time I don't leave pointless "Great post!" comments, I do try to add value to posts. I generally don't upvote posts that have just copied a link or video from somewhere else, although I might comment on them.
I don't think it's a grey area, I think it's just a matter of choice. Having said that if they restricted self voting I wouldn't be overly bothered.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'd be really interested to hear how the Self-Voting fits into your long term plan if you feel like sharing.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm just trying to build steempower, reputation and followers to the point where I can create a reasonable income from each of my posts (somewhere between $10 and $50). This will take a long time so in the meantime everything gets ploughed back into steempower. Generally if I get to the end of the day and I have plenty of voting power left I will use it up on self votes rather than let it sit at 100% which would be a waste of my voting power. Given that it all gets turned into steempower nobody loses out and many people gain from higher powered votes.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Seems logical and reasonable. Thanks for sharing :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In the end, nearly everyone is on this platform mainly to make some money. (how many of the blogs and posts would exist if there was no monetary rewards...)
When thinking in probabilities and return on investment, smaller accounts tend to earn a lot more actually. The more SP you have the more difficult it is to get back your own 10 full upvotes. This is why bigger accounts upvote eachother or why many of the whales turned into upvote bots or sell their votes. (why do any effort if you can earn way more without any effort at all especially because curation is broken)
Upvoting yourself 10 times each day is socially not accepted while running an upvote bidbot, selling upvotes or giving upvotes for upvotes is.
If everyone would use part of their SP and upvoting power to give something back to the community without asking anything in return, Steemit would be a much better place allready and give much more back over time. Bigger accounts to me have a bigger responsability in this regard.
Solutions:
No matter what happens it's always going to be a very grey area and hard to stop real abuse as people have a very short term mindset. It sure is an interesting topic to think about.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You and I think very similarly. I think it is an appreciation and tolerance for variance ;)
You make very good points about it being easier to get an ROI with a smaller SP and it's harder for the big whales to get a high ROI. Maybe that is why they do what they do. Sometimes so blatantly....
Curation definitely needs to be fixed because some of the big problems we see today are a direct result of people (like me) giving up on putting significant effort into Curation. Reward for flagging is an interesting idea. Might have to stew on that one for a bit as it could be open to abuse too.....
As for your AI suggestion to identify Circle Jerking I was thinking that EXACT same thing yesterday. It is going to feature in one of my next Grey Area posts as I have been thinking about how I would frame an SQL query around identifying circle jerks. This kind of thing is going to get easier as AI gets better.....but then again abusers will probably get smarter too.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
What about if we are all limited to up-voting a single account max 4 times per 24 hour period.
Even if you had a sock puppet account, you could only upvote yourself 4 times per day.
I don't think what you or the vast majority of people are doing is abuse.
I think abuse is posting 10 X 200 word fluff posts per day and up-voting them all 100%.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
But what if you had 4 sock puppet accounts? I don't underestimate the desire for some people to do what is needed to get their precious ROI.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I saw your link to this post on SSG. Thank you for writing this and apologies for not seeing it when it was earning $ for you.
Self voting on comments shits me to tears. I posted something a few days back that has gotten a large amount of notice. This women posts some crap comment, upvotes herself to the top of my comments (I think with a bigger vote than she gave me.) And then upvoted a second comment of her own on the same post that she made in reply to someone else’s comment on my post. It just seemed like she is trying to ride my trail on that post to her own reward. I have no SP otherwise I would have down voted her into negative $. I also tried to upvote more thoughtful comments above her but again I have no SP so my $0.00 vote didn’t compete with the $0.11 and $0.10 she dropped on herself.
I also saw a post by another steemian. Some guy came by, commented, upvoted himself but not the post. His comment was dumb and short. Then two of his cronies followed in upvoting his comment, but again not the original post.
It is so rude.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks. I had a look at your post and I agree it is rude. To self vote such a relatively large amount and not even upvote the post is just really poor form in book. It happens to us all.
There is starting to be some co-ordinated response to this sort of bad self-voting behaviour. Have a look at @sadkitten it is one I am supporting and it is an approach which is hopefully going to start chipping away at the problem.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thank you for sharing the info re @sadkitten. This seems like a very logical way to counter excessive self voting.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If you're running a competition where the prize is the SBD payout then a self vote increases the prize pool, so I think that's an acceptable use of self voting. Also if your post is a fundraiser for a cause then self voting could be considered acceptable to help increase the donation. I prefer to add a self vote the following day though, so it allows more curation for other voters
#3 would be a grey area for me too. As a newbie your self vote is hardly going to make an impact anyway, but once you're bigger then the chances are that you don't really need to self vote to reward your post as you'll have a following to do that for you.
I've only self voted a comment once and it was to say something that would be of benefit to the author the more people saw it. My vote was so puny I didn't get it far up the list, but a couple of others helped bump it up some more.
Self voting is like a lot of things. In the right hands it can do good in the wrong hands it's just an enabler of greed, but I don't think it should be gotten rid of just because some use it for selfish reasons.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Good point. Boosting prize pools or fundraisers seems a good use of self-vote. I guess the underlying theme here is that it is not "selfish" voting.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hey I wrote an article about this awhile ago.
My thoughts are that as a minnow it doesnt make to much of a difference whether you upvote your own content (I sometimes do) but I usually like to share around my upvotes with content I enjoy.
However as your upvote becomes worth more I think upvoting your own posts will obviously make them more visible which is a good thing (providing you are writing good content)
What I hate and disagree with is when people comment a meaningless comment on someones post and then upvotes their comment. Expecially if there upvote is worth a bit all it does is bring their meaningless comment to the top of the comments and push others further down the list
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That's a really good piece. Sorry I missed it.
I agree with you on the meaningless comment. It's annoying. It was happening to me consistently and that was the initial catalyst for my war declaration.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks! Good to share and discuss opinions :) Yeah I see it all the time. 'nice comment' and then the author has upvoted it for like $1... what a waste - it doesnt do anything to help or encourage minnows to grow - just lines their pockets
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Use a bit of then vp to flag their comments. Maybe some Will improve over time.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Great idea. Its worth a try for sure
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well it's what I tried. First thing is always reply to the comment and give an explanation for why you are flagging. If you're lucky they might even read it and learn from it :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I don't really think upvoting yourself is that big of a problem. Ya it sucks to see a whale 'waste' voting power on themselves and not someone else but if you are posting original content or adding value to the platform I think you have every right to reward yourself too.
I think we have a bigger problem with people spamming, posting articles and videos without citing sources. It's to a point where I see a lower rep post a lengthy well written article with no sources and I don't even bother voting for it because more often than not someone else wrote it.
I am more concerned about my good comments not getting up votes, in last two hours I have commented on 11 posts but no one has up voted. Selfish people.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well, you'll get a decent vote here for decent engagement, so come again soon! :)
I think some of those other problems will show up in future posts about the Grey Areas of STEEM.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I would draw the line when self voting is no longer necessary to launch undervalued posts in order to attain a "seed" audience.
Other words, when it reduces opportunity for supporters, when they are already on the hook to share in a reasonable % of the reward.
Many shrewd authors know that most curators are not aware that the reward pool can be and has been devalued for them.
I'd say it's another microcosm of what we see in the world all around us.
A gray area.. I think so - in that perception of need vs. greed.
"Gray area" is expected when there is a lack of structured boundaries but I don't think that these are necessary and may do more harm than good. Difference in opinion are healthy to a great extent provided these are not allowed to assume power over the choices of others.
By bringing it up in conversation however, if there are many actual human beings at the table- raises awareness and with that, a chance to shift additional weight toward communal benefit and growth.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm not quite understanding the entirety of your points. But I do like your initial sentence. Just wondering how you would measure or quantify that. By the number of followers? By the number of "organic" voters on previous posts?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I agree with you about upvoting in situation #1 and #2. I think a lot of poeple feel that Comment self voting is were the abuse starts, but I think like you said if it's simple to bump your comment and you vote a reasonable amount just to bump it then it's fine. I think people that drop votes on every single comment they make it abusive.
It's easy enough to check steem reports and see how much self voting is happening. For me 10% is the reasonable level and anything more starts to look abusive.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think we're of similar mind here. 10% would be great but I think once people start to hit 50+% then it looks like blatant abuse. My logic is that it's hard to add value (via a comment) to a post without any value so at minimum people should be upvoting the original post as much as their comment. At 50% self-vote it is probably about the same ROI as some of the lease rates or bid bot returns (where there is no engagement) and so at least there is "some" engagement if 50% of the VP is going to others.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
At First, i Saw self vote as a bad thing, but with time, i noticed that It is a 2 Edge sword.
You write an good post, but no one see It, and no one vote. Then is It really bad to self vote to get at least something back for you efforts? I dont think so.
The problem begins when the big sp holders do It all the time, no matter the quality of the article, but like you said, if there were no self votes, you could Just create another account, direct the sp to that account, and you would have the same effect with no shame. By the way, its easy to see that this already happen.
So, the existance of the self vote dont matter at all.
But here is something that need to be put on light: what is the objective of the user?
Short term or long term?
For short term, the self vote is a good Tool. You get a return on your investment for a Very low effort.
For long term, unless your have a really good content, self vote is the worst, because It Will put on the main page, the one that attract potential New big investors to steem (and the money to increase steem price), Will be Full of shit.
So here is my suggestion If you are in Steem as a long term investor: divide you daily vp in 3. 1/3 Go to your self vote, 1/3 Go to vote good quality posts, and the last 1/3 Go to flag shit content.
That way you can get your roi, and at the same time improve the front page of steemit, bringing in more and more users.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for your comment!
Your split is very interesting. 1/3 for Flagging seems to be a lot. But maybe if more people did that much flagging then we wouldn't have such a rubbish trending page.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I was upvoting my self routinely. I'm still scrambling for pennies here. I also upvote comments on my posts. I don't see any harm in it, but I was informed that it was frowned on and many would not upvote my posts if I had self voted. So, I stopped, but I'm about to start again. I just don't see how it's wrong to take care of #1.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I guess critics would say that voting for ones self on a social network is not really in the spirit of the platform where you're supposed to be making connections with others. So I understand why some would withhold their vote if they see too much self-voting.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Self voting has a range of benefits and rally no downsides for those who do it so we can expect that it will continue to be the order of the day. No matter what approach is mandated here there will be those who are happy and others who are unhappy. I think that to build a community you need those who understand that many will have to rise consistently or the platform will simply not survive. This should be incentive enough for almost everyone to participate in other's success. I think Steemit does a poor job of explaining this to people if this is actually the case.
I am also still trying to figure things out here and it is challenging. For instance an important question I have is: Can Whales continue to prosper without interacting with anyone else? I mean can someone come here and only be interested in the share price and prize pool and never have to be community oriented? I am not sure. I see people being accused of it. If this is the case, this is a flaw int he system. Just my thoughts.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well it has a downside if someone wants to start flagging you I guess :)
I'm not looking to mandate anything, just figure out what a reasonable and acceptable level of self-voting might be.
As for your comments about Whales. Yes, it is possible. They can get passive income from setting up a bid bot, selling votes or even leasing out SP. The Whales don't need to interact at all to get an income from STEEM.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for your comments. I have been advocating that the platform really needs to focus all of its efforts on community guidelines and training for those who want to do all we can to support the ecosystem. Too many people come here with their own ideas of what is going on as a result we have seriously inconsistent and sometimes conflicting agendas. I get that this is supposed to be in some ways a free for all, but this is the downside I believe. Social networking ecosystems are delicate and without oversight they constantly run the risk of collapsing. Just my thoughts.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I tend to agree, but I'm not sure how it can be done while respecting the anarchic principles and decentralisation that underlies the platform. I think forming a voluntary community with higher standards that people can opt in to is probably the way to go, but the closest I've seen to that is MSP.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for the comments. The challenge is that if these groups get formed they become a centralized group. My girlfriend is on Steemit and is Thai and is being threatened because she is posting Thai stories in English, even though they are positive stories and support all of the guidelines that Thai group set up. My point is that whatever suggestion we can think of will create some central authority that is by its nature going to impose some set of "guidelines" that have to have penalties and then you have a central authority. this where I am trying to figure out how these types of ecosystems will actually work. With no oversight and "rules" it is a free for all, and with them there is restricted behavior. I cannot see a compromise nor can I point to one that exists unless there is an overriding factor to make people do the right thing. A good example is a kibbutz or a cooperative farming model. But to have something like that here, we have to remove the big emphasis on money. The focus on money works against everything we seem to want to achieve here. Just my thoughts. thanks.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's a very good point, but it depends on the community. You might have a community run by a benevolant dictator, there might be some kind of democratically elected committe of reps or it could just be driven directly by some sort of consensus mechanism. I think that is potentially the beauty of the platform, you can build any kind of community on top of it with any kind of system of governance.
In many respects the Anarchic platform is a bit like a blank canvas. The law (code) of this blockchain is just a baseline.
PS - The group your girlfriend is in sounds a bit dysfunctional. If she's following guidelines and getting threatened then it does not seem to be running properly?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I fully agree that having a benevolent dictator type scenario can work but it will probably be temporary as things always change. Consensus is great too but as you know it and people can be manipulated or tricked into thinking they are doing the right thing.
I am struggling with this issue currently because I am working on a project with these exact issues. How to create communities not fiefdoms and and how to motivate people to do the right thing? Can it be done without strong arm tactics? How do you incentivize people to stay on the positive course. Challenging in today's world to say the least. 3 years ago I was offered to run a platform like Steemit but turned it down because I could not see how to move people away from being motivated by money to being interested in the community. I am still not sure it can actually work, so I am a student here. Watching. participating, and urging when I can. Our world needs environments where community is at the center, and I believe in humanity so I am helpful, but still searching.
In terms of my girlfriend, yes I agree. I suggested to her to contact the head of the group directly and see his demeanor. If he is unfair or unapologetic, then you have to disregard this group. This would be a shame because the Thai group is small and they are trying to bring people together. She has a great personality and fantastic organizational skills and she is motivated to help. We will see though.
Thanks and keep on thinking and focusing on making this place the one we know it can be. :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
what i do is upvoting only my posts not my comments. The main reason i upvote my posts is because i like what i write :P and also my vote isn't worth much at all. if i am in position that my vote worth over 10$ i don't think i am gonna 100% upvote myself but we will never know :p
Upvoting your own comments is a bit stupid. i can get it sometimes if you talk with some abusers or wanna point out something to just give a small upvoting % to your comment in order for everyone to see but if that's not the case i completely disagree
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think upvoting yourself can be seen as "believing in yourself". That the road in Steemit is lonely and that who better to back you, than you?
I don't upvote my own posts as I want to see organic growth within my account based on me improving my own blogging skills.
I think either way can be virtueous ... and others can condemn as they see fit.
But ultimately, Steemit allows for both, so it is just a matter of opinion. If Steemit didn't want it to happen, then it wouldn't happen.
I still believe that Steemit needs to become Guild like - the world is far and wide. To narrow it to a group of elite opinionators is just stifling creativity.
The Thought process is wide & narrow, high and low, and I would like to think that Steemit will contain both Angels & Demons.
This would reflect the Human Psyche! To be exposed to the elements of humanity, and to question and discuss openly, would be the ideal for me.
To upvote your own posts - both should be done and discussed and questioned and challenged - but to create an "Upvote Police Department" would be detrimental in the long term. (Insert any topic to replace the word "Self Upvote" and you will find levels of polarisation on what should be a spectrum.)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think, every one of us has its own style in utilizing self-voting. I do not want to blame your decision, although different from others. I appreciate your attitude as described above. even I see the tendency of almost all the steemians, to be involved as you feel.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think to each his own. I was against it in the beginning but after dropping 100s of dollars on my account to power up I felt less guilty.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's about finding the right balance. It looks to me like you've got a good balance so nothing to feel guilty about at all.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yeah i dont go too nuts. I upvote my posts but not comments. I do my best to het almost every post every day with a vote on SSG. Its rough lol
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Nice. This ask is very inspiration
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I feel realy sad about people like you who are from countries where english is not well adopted yet. I know you can not speak or write in english very well because its not your mother tounge. But please write little longer comments to show you are really putting some effort into it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm sorry. i a beginner. Maybe in the next post, I will be better. I'm glad if anyone is willing to teach me like this. Thanks
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I see every one steemian, like that @buggedout
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit