Slight correction with how you are doing your math, since each upvote takes away (at 100%) 2% of your remaining vp it would actually be (1-(0.02*VW))n where VW is voting weight (at 100% it would be 1) and n would be the number of votes. Using this we can determine the number of votes at 2% VW to be 576, not 500 and the rate of VP (voting power) returned isn't a flat 20 but rather a more complex function of amount remaining etc hence why you are more likely to see VP at 99.9% than 100% unless you leave it for a really long time. Next, again, RW doesn't necessarily upvote the amount of comments required in order to make your money back. Anyways 10 votes at 100% only drains your VP to 81% and 11 to 80% and I think that there lies behind some of your confusion about the math.
RE: Delegate SP to @randowhale the OG insta-vote bot and receive SBD!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Delegate SP to @randowhale the OG insta-vote bot and receive SBD!
Well if you treat it like a continuous function, then yes of course it would drain away the voting power. My calculations assume over the course of the day. So n could be at 100% and n + 1 would be x seconds later and also at 100%. Or more precisely, using the (555 * .02 * .02 * .9 = 20%), n is at 90%, but n + 1 is 156 seconds later and also at 90%. You could vote give a 2% upvote at 90% voting power every 156 seconds and every upvote would have the same value (and thereby capture the equivalent of a 10 full upvotes every day, because (10 * .02 * 1 = 555 * .02 * .02 * .9).
Now, obviously there would be some random distribution in the actual voting power, as purchase transactions are randomly distributed throughout the day, and sometimes the vote is at higher or lower power. But if the amount voted is correctly adjusted to always deliver a consistent return, then the value paid for an upvote would always be a function of the maximum upvote value. There would be high and low payout days, but over time the distribution would approach uniform and the value captured would be close to the value of 10 full upvotes daily.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Okay I see what you are saying now and would have to agree and assuming that the minimum required of an equivelant of ~10 full (100%) upvotes a day is completed then the ROI would be in around 40 days (41.6 days). Of course this is all prediction and hypothetical assuming that the curation reward is split perfectly proportional to the amount that you wold have gotten had you upvoted the post with the amount delegated. You are correct, I was wrong, well kind of. I was incorrect in that I overlooked something therefore having an incomplete analysis and for that I thank you!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You're welcome. It does assume perfect management and semi-consistent capture of upvote value. In practice I think the ROI would be much slower. I delegated 100 SP at the time we started our conversation and have had one payout that implies a much slower ROI.
I will give it some time and see how it goes, but the ROI I got from delegation to @msp-bidbot the same day was 3x as much.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
So my model is incorrect as it isn't paid out by curation but rather by payments.Anyways I have delegated 100 SP and receive an average of around 0.063 SBD (right now) which puts the expected time until I make an equitable amount of money in ~819 days. Since 100SP is roughly 0.013% that means that there is roughly 769230.769 SP delegated to him. Meaning if you delegated exactly that much (and got 50% of the profits) it would take you nearly 2000 days (not payout periods) to get your money back. I know these are rough estimates based upon ~36 hours of data but still.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yeah, that's why I said in practice the ROI would be much slower. I didn't realize you were actually considering it, or I would have shared more of my data. that 0.063 is actually one of the higher payments I have received. 819 days to payout is fine by normal business standards, but that's an eternity in crypto.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I should have used the data from you, and honestly I have more than enough SP to do what I want to do and still be able to invest the rest. Since the payout is every 12 hours I am getting more from this than I would from curation form upvoting other posts.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I had missed this part. If this is the case, it's actually doing better than I thought.
Especially since curation only pays out in SP, and the real value in post rewards right now is the SBD side.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well we do not know exactly how his system works.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit