I must not have been clear yesterday.
The proposal was that the @steemit account start voting for folks.
I proposed that we find a way to make that voting equitable.
I'd think that it wouldn't be hard to set the bot to vote only people that it hadn't voted in the last 30 days.
I haven't seen recent stats on how many posts are going up a month, but i'd think a 10% vote from the steemit account would be a nice boost.
Much better than a kick in the pants.
Have a perfectly peaceful day!
It has been stated on several occasions that the @steemit account will not be used for voting. I don't believe there are any plans to change that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If I could get a rationale to go with that,...?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
its far far too powerful? A 10% vote from the steemit account would be about 10 times the strength of a vote from smooth, bernie sanders or dantheman.
A 100% vote from the steemit account would likely redistribute the entire reward pool to whatever it voted on.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
So, a 1% vote would be a very large vote.
If what I've read has been interpreted correctly then when a whale votes it knocks poor people off the tail end of the reward pile by redirecting what had been given to the author by previous smaller account votes to the new author by virtue of the weight of the whale?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Rationale? The founders have stated that the account will not be used for voting. It is not a curating account.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Oooh, pardon me,...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
haha.. for sure - posted the suggestion a while back ..
https://steemit.com/steem/@steembriefing/steemit-make-it-rain
.. although it was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek suggestion
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm still onboard with the redistribution to the users.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Isn't this what #curie is for?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
And SteemGuild. And Robin Hood Whale. And others.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If you jump through their hoops they give you a bone, sure,...but I'm not a trained seal, in fact, I could even be termed, 'unpopular'!!
If I was to make any popularity lists here it would be time for me to leave.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thank you!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
But how would that work? Random? That might not be wise, as every now and then some not-so-good content would get a kick.
Do you mean use @steemit votes as a kind of equalizer, by (say) following the Daily Tribune lists? Dunno if that's the best way to go, tho' it has an emotional appeal (helping the underdog.)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm thinking that there are no good reasons that steemit couldn't vote all monthly active users.
The reason I'm thinking that is because we need more people to want to be here.
When a new user gets a whale vote that encourages them to stick around and try to cultivate an audience.
Or maybe I would just like to see one more regular voter in our voting stats.
Maybe the bot could be set to vote the 10th, 20th, 30th, etc,...post rather than monthly.
I'm sure that cheetah could be relied upon to keep the low rep folks off the list.
Perhaps I just haven't heard the reason they decided to not vote the @steemit account.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
that would do the opposite of what you want (an equalizer). Because its votes would be worth more vsahres on top of already successful posts. It would make the rewards distribution longer and pointier.
It would give everyone more vshares, but it would increase the amount of vshares to get any payout at all by a number more than the amount of vshares it gave everyone, if that makes sense.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Ok, if I've grokked that, then it explains why I had 21 posts, in a row, that initially had a 2cent payout but went to zero at payout time.
That leads me to believe that my idea is needed all the more.
Rather than those vshares going to the already popular, steemit would redirect them to random users, mostly unknowns.
To my way of thinking the whales should be voting randomly to encourage activity on the platform.
If fewer people had zeros on https://steemit.com/cashout more of them would tell their friends.
As a new user I find the exclusivity exercised in the hierarchy here, not just in the whales, but in other classes as well, to be a daunting obstacle to overcome.
This leads me to advocate even more that an equalizing force be put out there to mitigate against the echo chamber's hero worship.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hmm.. I'm only guessing, but I think the reason why @steemit doesn't vote is:
a) If it were voted manually, there'd be accusations of favouritism all over the place;
b) If it were voted automatically, the algo would be gamed.
As far as "vote all monthly active users," we can only vote on content. Also, voting too frequently dilutes the voting power.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I agree that 'a' is a problem, that is why it would have to be crowd configured bot.
One that only votes sequentially, no repeats.
We can vote on whatever we want, but to be socially responsible, the @steemit account's votes would have to be equitable.
Voting power could be controlled for efficiency in the bot's rules.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This post has been ranked within the top 50 most undervalued posts in the first half of Jan 06. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $4.81 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Jan 06 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit