The truth is that most people vote without even examining the content of the post. You can see this by examining the number of votes compared to the number of views for any article. Often voting is based on the apparent value of the article as a potential curating reward than on its perceived interest. I have noticed that I get more votes if I open with an upvote of my own with a value of $1 or more. My own strategy now is to post, and about twenty minutes later return and upvote myself. It is at that point, once people see money available that people vote. We could of course prevent people voting for themselves, but we would just get people plotting cross voting in cash support of each other. Alternatively we could set a limit to the value of a vote, say $10, and that would greatly reduce the influence of Whales on the voting structure with regard to imbalance. The presumption of the white paper, however, is that people will vote to maximise their own gains in the long run because Steem Power is by design forced to be held for the long term. We are still in the early days of the Steemit platform, and voting behaviour ought to adapt to the interests of the platform over time in order to maintain the value of Steem Power.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
one of the fundamental problems with steemit, people only using it to make a buck. Post real, fun original content for that reason and the money will follow. Lead with thinking that "I'm going to make a cool post to make a bunch of money" and if usually ends up being a crappy post.
I wish I had that big of an upvote! :)