You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The Curation Conundrum

in #curation7 years ago

The one thing I noticed about the fallout from Hardfork 18 was that the minnows with sliders on their vote button, grew very conservative and rarely voted at 100%. After the first few days of abnormally high payouts, my rewards substantially dropped - now, if a whale or dolphin doesn't vote for me, I'm back to getting $2.00 per post regardless of content or quality. Also, if some of my followers do not auto-vote, but vote manually and delay or overlook me, it's even worse. If a post isn't up-voted within an hour, it's usually a lost cause - after 4 hours, forgeddaboutit. Rarely, does much happen in terms of rewards after the first day

Sort:  

I've noticed the same trend @johnjgeddes. On the other hand... I read and comment on a lot of content (including comments) in the course of a day, and my objective is to burn no more voting power in a given day than I can come back the following morning and start over with at least 95% power. In a sense, I like the current structure because if I see something truly amazing I can give it 100%, but if it's just average-to-good it'll get 15-30% and that still makes it feasible for me to look at 50-60 pieces per day.

Which isn't to say that there's aren't a bunch of people out there who aren't just outright fearful of "voting too much" so they sway in the opposite direction.

I would say that few of my posts move significantly after the first 24 hours... but before that they can; perhaps the result of publishing at "odd hours" so I hit many different time zones.

Thanks, @denmarkguy - you made some good points - publishing at odd hours I can try so as to hit those other time zones but publishing at set times also so I don't lose my base. I like your rationale for allotting your voting power - I think I'll adopt that, but don't take it personally if I only vote 25% on one of your posts LOL!!

Yes. It also seems a lot less people are voting in general and I'm not sure why.